[Crm-sig] E-Votes , rules

Robert Sanderson RSanderson at getty.edu
Thu Apr 16 17:34:55 EEST 2020

Thanks George, Martin!

For the form, perhaps we could split out a comment section for each, to avoid having to manually count YES in the Other field?
Or for general discussion, perhaps we bring it back to the list directly?

In particular:

The examples for P130 and P156 would benefit from the Exx numbers in parentheses, as per other property examples.

I agree that the coffee cup shows features of the starbucks logo, in that it shows the Visual Item so it is technically correct … but I’m not sure that it sets the right precedent, as there is a better property for that (P65, a sub-sub-property of P130). I think that examples should be examples of the current class or property whenever possible.


From: Crm-sig <crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr> on behalf of Martin Doerr <martin at ics.forth.gr>
Date: Thursday, April 16, 2020 at 5:50 AM
To: "crm-sig at ics.forth.gr" <crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
Subject: [Crm-sig] E-Votes , rules

Dear All,

I'd like to add that the VETO function is meant to start a discussion for reformulation of the proposed solution, typically related to controversial evidence, lacking evidence, a proposal for a more effective solution, or violation of modelling principles, as mentioned below. After due discussion, the issue can be put for e-mail vote in a different form, or will be discussed in face-to-face meetings.

I may remind you that all crm-sig members are entitled to call for an e-mail vote, if the issue has been presented in a decidable form.

Thank you George for setting this up!



On 4/16/2020 10:37 AM, George Bruseker wrote:
Dear all,

After our last meeting of the CIDOC CRM SIG (25-28 February, 2020, Athens, Hellenic National Committee of ICOM), we are very close to releasing a new official, community version of CIDOC CRM (Version 7) which will enable the release of official, community encodings of the standard taking into account the significant development work that has taken place over the past few years.

Several issues, however, have remained open which we hope to tie up as efficiently as possible, especially engaging e-voting wherever possible to speed up the process. Therefore, with this mail, I am sending you a number of forms on which I would like to solicit your vote regarding several proposed changes.

With regards to a proposed change, the possible votes are:

Yes = accept/agree
No = do not accept/agree
Other = With other you can either introduce a caveat (e.g.: 'Yes, but there is a typo on word x, fix it.') or you can write VETO, if you wish to stop the proposed change from happening, in which case you should also write a justification (e.g.: 'VETO, this change is unacceptable because it violates the following principle...')

In order to make vote counting easier, we have organised the vote questions into google forms. We really appreciate you taking the time to support the standard by contributing your voice.

Every CIDOC CRM class or property should be accompanied by at least one illustrative example. Therefore, a number of new examples were drawn up to fill in data for properties and classes that have been introduced but not yet provided proper examples.

1 Miscellaneous Examples

Here a number of miscellaneous classes and properties have been bundled. Please read the class/property scope notes and check the example and vote if you accept/agree with the example.


2 Space Time Volume and Temporal Properties Examples

Significant innovation has occurred in the model regarding the use of space time volumes and means for representing temporal relations. Please read the class/property scope notes and check the example and vote if you accept/agree with the example.


3 Presence Class and Related Properties Examples

The Presence class and its related properties, as a specialisation of STV, are another important addition to the standard for which examples have been generated. Please read the class/property scope notes and check the examples and vote if you accept/agree with the example.


4 New property for Presence Class

In the elaboration of the above examples, it was proposed that it may be desirable/necessary to introduce a new property to the presence class which allows the documentation of the relation between an instance of E93 Presence and an instance of E53 Place. Therefore, this form allows you to vote on a) if the new property should be introduced, b) if you accept the proposed scope note and c) if you accept the various examples.


These votes are called on April 16, 2020 and the voting period will last until April 30, 2020. Thank you again for your participation in this process. As we experiment with new ways to efficiently manage SIG matters with online tools, we are of course happy to have feedback on the process/tools (good or bad).


George Bruseker


Crm-sig mailing list

Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr<mailto: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,

 GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece


 Email: martin at ics.forth.gr<mailto:martin at ics.forth.gr>

 Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Getty. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify the sender and know the content is safe.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/pipermail/crm-sig/attachments/20200416/bbfff85d/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Crm-sig mailing list