[Crm-sig] CRMarcheo -embedding

Hiebel, Gerald Gerald.Hiebel at uibk.ac.at
Mon Mar 29 08:34:09 EEST 2021


Dear All,

thanks for your thoughts on the matter.
I believe Achille is right in the sense that there will not be an embedding just in an A3 but as Martins example shows an A3 may be included in an embedding.
So I would opt for Christian Emils suggestion to lift the range of AP19 is embedding in to A8 to accommodate both options.

One case I am thinking of is a drawing of a stratigraphic excavation that shows the interface (A3) between two layers and the position of a find in the drawing.
What is actually depicted is the Embedding in the Interface. If I only want to document the content of the drawing I would need to make a statement  that  relates the embedding to the depicted A3. From other documentation I could get other statements that relate the Embedding to A2s and thus I could complete the picture of the embedding and relate each statement to the source where it was stated.

Best,
Gerald

From: Crm-sig <crm-sig-bounces at ics.forth.gr> on behalf of Achille Felicetti via Crm-sig <crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
Reply to: Achille Felicetti <achille.felicetti at pin.unifi.it>
Date: Sunday, 28. March 2021 at 20:14
To: Martin Doerr <martin at ics.forth.gr>
Cc: "crm-sig at ics.forth.gr" <crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] CRMarcheo -embedding

Dear Martin,

These are very interesting and suggestive considerations.
I will definitely treasure them.

Bests,
Achille


Il giorno 27 mar 2021, alle ore 11:32, Martin Doerr <martin at ics.forth.gr<mailto:martin at ics.forth.gr>> ha scritto:

Hi Achille,

That is basically no problem. It can quite easily be formulated in FOL that at least one of the Units must be an A2, and it should be in the scope note. Anyway, lack of knowledge may require that the necessary A2 is not documented. In that case, the FOL can make sure that one can infer such lack of knowledge.

More generally, as Nicola Guarino has written in his foundational paper, formal ontologies try to minimize unintended applications, but cannot completely exclude them.

All the best,

Martin

On 3/26/2021 10:23 PM, Achille Felicetti wrote:
Dear Martin, Christian-Emil,

Thank you for the interesting insights. For the scenario described by Martin I fully agree with what he writes and surely it makes sense to consider an embedding as distributed among different layers in the very common case in which it spans over multiple and stratigraphic strata of different kind (A2 + A3).

However, the problem that I see is formal, since changing the range of AP19 would allow the definition of triples like the following:

(X is-a A7 embedding) —> AP19 is embedding in —> (Y is-a A3 Stratigraphic Interface)

that will become formally correct from the point of view of the model, but conceptually disputable in my opinion.

I can't think of a solution that accommodates everything.

Best,
A.


Il giorno 26 mar 2021, alle ore 19:35, Martin Doerr via Crm-sig <crm-sig at ics.forth.gr<mailto:crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>> ha scritto:

Dear Christian-Emil, Achille,

When talking about embeddings, I am not so much thinking of an isolated item, but things like the Talheim Death Pit with thousands of bones, where each exact position is vital for the assignment to complete corpses.

I am also thinking of a thing embedded by multiple layers. First the lower half, then the upper half. Should somehow be consistent with the physical relations. The first would provide the chronology when the deposition started.

We can think of sets of Amphorae, upright metal objects or so, tall enough to be embedded by multiple layers.

This would justify embedding in A8, and A3 interfaces taking part in the embedding, just as considering intersections of A3 Interfaces as physical relations.

Best,

Martin

On 3/26/2021 4:49 PM, Christian-Emil Smith Ore via Crm-sig wrote:
You are quite correct, it would be a 2-dimentional embedding. In the 2D world a pencil stroke is a unpassable hindrance.

On the other hand  AP 9 is not a total property. And also not all persons can give birth at least not now.
C-E


________________________________
From: Achille Felicetti <achille.felicetti at pin.unifi.it><mailto:achille.felicetti at pin.unifi.it>
Sent: 26 March 2021 11:30
To: Christian-Emil Smith Ore
Cc: crm-sig
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] CRMarcheo -embedding

Dear Christian-Emil,

I understand the practical need of this operation, but I also fear that this may cause further conceptual inconsistencies since, I imagine, in no way an embedding can be embedded in an A3 as the latter is a feature.

I think it would be more fruitful to apply a constrain on the use of A2 in case an A7 is instantiated … Is this reasonable?

Best,
A.


Il giorno 26 mar 2021, alle ore 09:27, Christian-Emil Smith Ore via Crm-sig <crm-sig at ics.forth.gr<mailto:crm-sig at ics.forth.gr>> ha scritto:

Dear all,
In issue 447 the SIG has decided to make A7 Embedding a subclass of  S20. Ok.
In many excavations  archaeologists record structures without specifying layer (A2) versus surface (A3). Therefore such documented things can only be modelled as instances of the A8, the superclass of A2 and A3.
Currently

  *   AP19 is embedding in (contains embedding) [[D: A7 Embedding; R: A2 Stratigraphic Volume Unit]
To be able to document an embedding in the documentation described above, it would be beneficial to lift the range of AP19 to A8 Archeological Unit:
AP19 is embedding in (contains embedding) [[D: A7 Embedding; R: A8 A8 Archeological Unit​]

Comments?

Best,
Christian-Emil
_______________________________________________
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<mailto: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<mailto:martin at ics.forth.gr>

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





--

------------------------------------

 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<mailto: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/20210329/e686792f/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list