[Crm-sig] E21 Person, E67 Birth

Martin Doerr martin at ics.forth.gr
Mon Sep 23 16:51:12 EEST 2019

Dear Franco, All,

I agree, we have typically no coming into existence, or it is quite 
undefined. This is a nice case to discuss the border cases we encounter 
with all concepts.

Typically, the biological process is that of birth or alike. The 
stillborn baby may be buried without social identity given. We could 
have a type of Birth, with all except the coming into existence. We 
could agree that ontologically, there is some coming into existence, but 
a birth event does not necessarily end in a new E21 Person.

The methodologically important question is which states of ignorance do 
we encounter? Are the typical historical documents, in which the outcome 
of a document birth may be unknown as it is in reality before it 
happens? Or are the stillborn or miscarriage clearly distinct, because 
we normally describe birth as secondary information about a Person?

I assume the typical document uncertainty is between abortion, 
miscarriage, stillborn or dying at birth, but clearly separated if the 
baby lives. As an independent event, it is alternative to Birth. That 
would rather suggest a superclass of Birth, ending pregnancy.



On 9/23/2019 12:58 PM, Franco Niccolucci wrote:
> As already explained I would better avoid Birth, and even Coming into 
> existence.
>  Birth has two properties P96 by mother and P97 by father, the former 
> being of course more important. Using E5 Event does not allow this, so 
> you can only use P11 had participant. If I remember well there is no 
> P11.1 in the role of, but perhaps this may be harmlessly added. If 
> not, a dirty solution is giving a Type to the Actor involved like
> P11 had participant E39 Actor ‘Mary Doe’ P2 has type “mother”
> Maybe colleagues can find a more elegant solution; type in this case 
> is a role, not a property of the lady. But in my opinion only a *P11.1 
> in the role of ‘mother’ would work.
> Best
> Franco
> Il giorno lun 23 set 2019 alle 11:34 athinak <athinak at ics.forth.gr 
> <mailto:athinak at ics.forth.gr>> ha scritto:
>     Dear Franco,
>     your comments are very useful and I think you are right, maybe
>     this is
>     about a more general concept or we may miss something with the
>     definition of E67 Birth(?). And what about the parents? they are
>     participants in this biological event? Especially the mother who
>     acts,
>     performs intentionally, especially in cases of stillborn, the
>     procedure
>     is to start labour. I am concerned with the definition of the birth
>     event.
>     Thank you for the feedback
>     Athina
>     Στις 2019-09-23 11:45, Franco Niccolucci έγραψε:
>     > My suggestion would be to avoid being involved in ethical and
>     > religious discussions (when does the ‘person’ start to be such?)
>     > and go one step up in the entity hierarchy so:
>     > * instead of E21 Person use E20 Biological Object (superclass of
>     E21)
>     > qualified with P2 has type
>     > * instead of E67 Birth use E5 Event qualified with P2 has type.
>     In my
>     > opinion using instead E63 Beginning of existence (superclass of E67)
>     > is risky because applying the identity criteria to a fetus is
>     > uncertain and subject to ethical discussion, so the only safe
>     solution
>     > is to record when it manifests to the world with a birth or
>     > miscarriage.
>     >
>     > Best
>     >
>     > Franco
>     >
>     > Il giorno lun 23 set 2019 alle 10:21 athinak
>     <athinak at ics.forth.gr <mailto:athinak at ics.forth.gr>> ha
>     > scritto:
>     >
>     >> Dear all,
>     >>
>     >> I am working on a project relating to historical information
>     >> (sources)
>     >> on Seafaring lives and Maritime Labour in 19th-20th century -
>     we map
>     >> the
>     >> raw data to CIDOC CRM (or an extension of it). Historians collect
>     >> data
>     >> from various records, such as Civil Registers, which are records
>     >> documenting persons born or dead - basically, they register the
>     >> deaths.
>     >> So I have this case: they register as  persons the miscarriages or
>     >> the
>     >> stillborn or the abortions, and they assign attributes such as the
>     >> number of registration,  personal information
>     (name,surname,etc. )of
>     >> the
>     >> parents, the place of residence (which is the parents address, of
>     >> course) and the sex of the aborted or still born (something they
>     >> knew
>     >> afterwards). I suppose this is a difficult ethical and biological
>     >> subject- my question is how would you model the miscarriage or the
>     >> still
>     >> born or the abortion? It is not exactly defined as E21 Person
>     and if
>     >> it
>     >> is a case of still born, it can be a kind of a E67 Birth Event, but
>     >> if
>     >> it is a miscarriage, I believe it is not a birth event, it is a
>     >> different biological process, so what is it?
>     >>
>     >> Any thoughts that would help?
>     >>
>     >> thanks,
>     >>
>     >> Athina Kritsotaki
>     >> _______________________________________________
>     >> Crm-sig mailing list
>     >> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
>     >> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
> _______________________________________________
> Crm-sig mailing list
> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig

  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,
  GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece
  Email: martin at ics.forth.gr
  Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20190923/e1c45eb2/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Crm-sig mailing list