[Crm-sig] NEW ISSUE: Normal Custodian Of?

Martin Doerr martin at ics.forth.gr
Sat Mar 7 17:43:30 EET 2020


Dear Robert, All,

I see the point, but propose another solution. I have even proposed to 
deprecate "current permanent location", because the "permanent" is hard 
to be objectified, and here extremely specific to a certain inventory 
practice.

I'd rather argue, that the current keeper of an object that is handed 
out for loan stays obliged for safe-guarding the object. So, a property 
"has temporary keeper" would be much more informative, and positively 
states what is happening. We should just accept a "current keeper" being 
simultaneaously in charge with a "temporary keeper", and the event of 
change of custody to the respective temporary keeper will specify anyhow 
the character of the transfer.

If transfers of custody are completely registered, as the examples 
suggest, there is no need for further differentiations of stateful 
properties, because the type of transfer can register that.

In any case, think of "Guernica" ! Reality can be very complex;-)

Best,

Martin

On 3/6/2020 12:10 AM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
>
> Another use case which has come up:
>
> A painting is given from the Paintings department, which is the normal 
> custodian, to the Conservation department, in order to perform 
> conservation work on it.
>
> The Conservation department has custody of it, but the Paintings 
> department is still the normal custodian.  The ownership of the object 
> doesn’t change. And potentially the physical location of it doesn’t 
> either, if the conservation work is being done in place in the 
> gallery, such as the current work on the Nightwatch at the 
> Rijksmuseum, or Blue Boy at the Huntingdon here in California.
>
> Rob
>
> *From: *George Bruseker <george.bruseker at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 6:14 AM
> *To: *Robert Sanderson <RSanderson at getty.edu>
> *Cc: *crm-sig <crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
> *Subject: *Re: [Crm-sig] NEW ISSUE: Normal Custodian Of?
>
> It seems to make sense to raise as an issue. The case does seem to 
> come up reasonably frequently. The parallel seems convincing. For the 
> moment we could cover temporal elements by initiating the existing of 
> the property via an E13 attribute assignment (if we had such info).
>
>
>
>     On Feb 15, 2020, at 2:33 AM, Robert Sanderson
>     <RSanderson at getty.edu <mailto:RSanderson at getty.edu>> wrote:
>
>     Apologies, I should have put NEW ISSUE in the subject for this
>     originally.
>
>     As a quick proposal to discuss:
>
>     With P54 has current permanent location as a precedent, I would
>     propose a Pxx has current permanent custodian as a new property to
>     manage the knowledge described in the email below.
>
>     Happy to work on a scope note for it if that’s a useful thing to
>     add to the ontology.
>
>     Rob
>
>     *From:*Robert Sanderson <RSanderson at getty.edu
>     <mailto:RSanderson at getty.edu>>
>     *Date:*Tuesday, January 7, 2020 at 12:24 PM
>     *To:*"crm-sig at ics.forth.gr <mailto:crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>"
>     <crm-sig at ics.forth.gr <mailto:crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>>
>     *Subject:*Normal Custodian Of?
>
>     Dear fellow SIG folks,
>
>     Happy new year😊
>
>     A question came up here as to how to record the normal custodian
>     of an object, as opposed to the current custodian.
>
>     For example, if we have custody of an object but it’s a permanent
>     loan from a donor, and we lend it to another organization for an
>     exhibition, then the owner doesn’t change (still the donor,
>     probably wanting to remain anonymous) and there’s a transfer of
>     custody from ourselves to the exhibiting organization.  If that’s
>     a travelling exhibit, it might pass through several custodians
>     before it should eventually return to us.
>
>     Is there a way to track this not-quite-an-owner but
>     not-just-the-current-custodian state?  The only way that I can see
>     is to model the right of permanent custody separate from the right
>     of temporary custody… but then we re-enter the rights and temporal
>     validity arena.  Perhaps this would be another motivating use case
>     for moving forward with that work?
>
>     Many thanks for your thoughts,
>
>     Rob
>
>     --
>
>     *Rob Sanderson*,**Semantic Architect  |  Getty Digital  |
>     getty.edu <http://getty.edu/>
>
>     <image001.jpg>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     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
>
> 	
>
> *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.*
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
  
  Vox:+30(2810)391625
  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/20200307/db882be5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list