[Crm-sig] A symbol made of symbols

Ethan Gruber ewg4xuva at gmail.com
Fri Nov 8 17:15:39 EET 2019


Hi George,

I think this makes a lot of sense. I can use the D1 Digital Object, and
this is pretty useful for us as I would like to be able to associate the
SVG with the person who created it or other processes of production
(derived from a font file, e.g.). I've forwarded to the Nomisma list and
hopefully we'll agree and start publishing our monograms online soon.

Thanks,
Ethan

On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 6:28 AM George Bruseker <george.bruseker at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Ethan,
>
> Here is my take.
>
>
>
> I have a large number (thousands) of monograms that appear on Greek
> coinage. There is an SVG file that represents an idealized form of the
> monogram. The Nomisma ontology has a nmo:Monogram class, and I am
> attempting to link Nomisma more directly as subclasses or subproperties to
> CIDOC-CRM ones. A monogram fits the definition of a subclass of
> crm:E37_Mark:
>
> "This  class  comprises  symbols,  signs,  signatures  or  short  texts
>  applied  to  instances  of  E24  Physical Man-Made Thing by arbitrary
> techniques in order to indicate the creator, owner, dedications, purpose,
> etc."
>
>
> Yes, it seems the right match.
>
>
> In this sense, if I want to link a monogram to its constituent letters, is
> P106_is_composed_of the appropriate property for this?
>
> For example, I have a URI for a monogram,
> http://numismatics.org/ocre/symbol/monogram.ric.10.theodosius_ii.3
>
> Therefore:
>
> <http://numismatics.org/ocre/symbol/monogram.ric.10.theodosius_ii.3> a
> nmo:Monogram ;
>   crm:P106_is_composed_of "T" ;
>   crm:P106_is_composed_of "H" .
>
>
> This also seems the right match. If you are not concerned about the
> particular form of the letters, then I guess you could make the letters
> instances of E90 Symbolic Object.
>
> etc.
>
> The next question I have is how do I link this concept of a monogram to
> one or more SVG files that represent this monogram? There could be variant
> images based on individual styles of die-carvers, but scholars agree these
> variations represent the same semantic concept.
>
>
> I am looking at the documentation for P138 represents, and I am having a
> difficult time understanding the distinction between the examples where a
> digital file (PLY 3D model or a JPEG image) is the E36 Visual Item, but in
> other documentation the E36 Visual Item seems more conceptual.
>
> If a Visual Item is definitionally an E1 CRM Entity, then a Visual Item
> can still represent another Visual Item, correct? So:
>
> <http://numismatics.org/ocre/symbol/monogram.ric.10.theodosius_ii.3> a
> nmo:Monogram ;
>   crm:P106_is_composed_of "T" ;
>   crm:P106_is_composed_of "H" ;
>   crm:P138i_has_representation <
> http://numismatics.org/ocre/symbols/monogram.ric.10.theodosius_ii.3> #svg
> file url
>
>
> For the question of relating the instance of Mark (the monograms) to the
> SVG, I would do this otherwise. I would take advantage of D1 Digital Object
> class for the instances of SVG and their characteristics. [if you won’t
> like extensions, then E73 information object] I would then link the
> instances of D1 to the individual marks through the p165
> <http://www.cidoc-crm.org/Property/P165-incorporates/Version-6.2.1> incorporation
> property which allows one information object to incorporate another.
>
> For the question of relating one instance of Mark (such that that is
> uniquely identifiable from another but which is nevertheless a variant of
> the same Mark), you could make use of the p130
> <http://www.cidoc-crm.org/Property/P130-shows-features-of/Version-6.2.1> property
> ’shows features of’. It has a property on property that allows you to
> specify the kind of similarity.
>
> I attach an example of the proposed solution as a diagram. I guess the one
> part of your problem that it does not address is the ur-imageness of the
> one idealization. I guess the ur type did not historically exist but is the
> composite based on scholarly research. Therefore it sounds like creation of
> a type, see E83
> <http://www.cidoc-crm.org/Entity/E83-Type-Creation/Version-6.2.1>
> Perhaps this is a picture for a type? Or you could make one instance of
> Mark which is the ur instance and say that all the other instance are
> related to it in particular as variant, but that doesn’t seem correct at
> first thought.
>
> Best,
>
> George
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Ethan
> _______________________________________________
> Crm-sig mailing list
> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20191108/f94211db/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: monogram.png
Type: image/png
Size: 73608 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20191108/f94211db/attachment-0001.png>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list