[Crm-sig] NEW ISSUE: Approximate Dimensions
martin at ics.forth.gr
Sat Oct 19 22:08:51 EEST 2019
On 10/18/2019 9:48 PM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
> (Snipping to avoid the list’s length filter)
> I agree that it would be lovely if everyone recorded the measurement
> activities in detail, including with margins of error. But this isn’t
> a physics documentation group, it’s museums. That others do it better
> than we do is great, but doesn’t address the current practice of the
> domain and its information systems.
Well, we are concerned with conservation analytical methods, and
archaeometrics, which do use error margins. In case of sloppy data by
museums, I'd argue we really do not need to care about precise and true
values at all, isn't it? We can interpret the absence of error margins
(P90a,b) as an approximation without known errors. Isn't it?
> That said, the removal of the “true quantity” part of the scope note
> addresses at least the semantic part of the concern, that it’s
> currently impossible to abide by the definition. The implementation
> concern of asserting that two approximations are related can be
> considered separately 😊
> *From: *Crm-sig <crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr> on behalf of Martin
> Doerr <martin at ics.forth.gr>
> *Date: *Friday, October 18, 2019 at 10:26 AM
> *To: *"crm-sig at ics.forth.gr" <crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
> *Subject: *Re: [Crm-sig] NEW ISSUE: Approximate Dimensions
> I think there’s some very similar practice however of providing
> multiple values for the same dimension, that at least are
> roundings from the same measurement.
> I wold see this as different. Measurements use some device and
> procedure. Properly document, we understand their behaviour. A spot
> marked on a map near something has no particular procedure associated.
> For example the Met’s descriptions have “H. 14 5/16 in. (36.4 cm)”
> and similar , ours are the other way around “23 x 16.5 cm (9
> 1/16 x 6 ½ in.)”  as does MFA Boson , the NGA  and many
> With P90a and P90b we could give a margin of error, but indeed
> that is not common practice that I can find.
> Well, in natural sciences it is. That's what physicist learn to do...
> Serious publications require it always.
> > I suggest to regard any dimension as an approximation, except for
> counting stable aggregates of things.
> Do you mean then to remove the “true quantity” description from
> the scope notes?
> Crm-sig mailing list
> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
Dr. Martin Doerr
Honorary Head of the
Center for Cultural Informatics
Information Systems Laboratory
Institute of Computer Science
Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)
N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton,
Email: martin at ics.forth.gr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Crm-sig