[Crm-sig] Modelling 'Transcription' Advice?

Nicola Carboni nic.carboni at gmail.com
Mon Jul 26 10:17:41 EEST 2021


Dear George, all,

As Martin pointed out CRMtext surely provide a solutions (there is 
indeed a class transcription), however in the past I found myself using 
the same modelling that Rob proposed (using P2 instead of P32 on the 
activity node)


Best,

Nicola


--
Nicola Carboni
Visual Contagion
Digital Humanities - dh.unige.ch
Faculté des Lettres
Université de Genève
5, rue de Candolle
1211 Genève 4

On 22 Jul 2021, at 17:08, Martin Doerr via Crm-sig wrote:

> Dear Rob, All,
>
> I think this is a question to CRMtex, and Achille and Francesca, which 
> should provide a general theory of transcriptions.
>
> All the best,
>
> martin
>
> On 7/22/2021 4:59 PM, Robert Sanderson via Crm-sig wrote:
>>
>> What about:
>>
>>  A a E33_Linguistic_Object ;
>>   P94i_was_created_by Creation .
>> Creation a E65_Creation ;
>>   p2_has_type or p32_used_general_technique <aat:transcription> ;
>>   p16_used_specific_object B .
>>
>> Rob
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 5:58 AM George Bruseker via Crm-sig 
>> <crm-sig at ics.forth.gr <mailto:crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>> wrote:
>>
>>     Dear all,
>>
>>     Just a general question to the crowd.
>>
>>     Sometimes one has transcribed data of a very simple form.
>>
>>     A is supposed to represent B and it has been copied by someone
>>     with the intention of so doing.
>>
>>     A is a transcription of B
>>
>>     A [E33] is a transcription of B [E33]
>>
>>     This could be modelled numerous ways using CIDOC CRM. If one is
>>     looking for the most direct/binary way, I suppose that the only
>>     choice is "p130 shows features of". If you wanted to capture the
>>     mode of relation then you would use p130.1 has type and indicate
>>     'transcription'.
>>
>>     I notice, however, that we do have 'has translation' as a sub
>>     property of P130 shows features of, as an apparently useful to 
>> the
>>     community binary property specializing P130 to that specific
>>     scenario.
>>
>>     Has anyone else done modelling of transcriptions before with the
>>     aim of not recording the event but only the binary relation and 
>> if
>>     so, did you come up with any interesting solutions?
>>
>>     A property would be handy in case anyone has created and 
>> published
>>     a specialization that could just be reused?
>>
>>     Thanks for any insight! Maybe I miss an obvious trick from LRM?
>>
>>     All the best,
>>
>>     George
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     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
>>     <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Rob Sanderson
>> Director for Cultural Heritage Metadata
>> Yale University
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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


> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210726/fd11e86a/attachment.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list