[Crm-sig] E-vote: LRMoo, deprecation of R10 has member

Martin Doerr martin at ics.forth.gr
Mon Apr 4 21:09:48 EEST 2022


Dear All,

I vote VETO.

Reason: The proposed scope note for R67 will still contain: "conceived 
at some point in time to form together a logical whole". This means to 
my opinion, that by deprecating R10, an instance of Work cannot evolve 
over time into some subsets that, following one group of librarians, 
form a Work in its own right, and following another group of librarians, 
form only expressions of the same work. This implies absolute, global 
decisions about instances of Work, rather breaking the ability to 
integrate such points of view.
To my opinion, if we perceive the Work level as an aggregation point to 
serve user interests, it must be relatively unconstrained to introduce a 
work level. This was also argued for by Richard Smiraglia.

  It would become even more complicated, when, e.g., a new series of R67 
related sibling works would appear, because the two wholes can no more 
form part of a "super" work, because the two were never "conceived at 
some point in time to form together a logical whole".

Obviously, the Work construct, which admits an evolution like a living 
body, but without loosing any shape it had in the past, cannot be 
structured based on a simultaneity concept of parthood alone, as I have 
argued repeatedly in the past. It must necessarily admit temporal parts 
and synchronous parts, and all mixed forms of asynchronous strands. 
This, to my memory, was the reason for designing R10, and not the 
Individual-Complex Work relation only. I think there*must be reasonable* 
examples proving that R67 alone will not be able to support more complex 
forms of evolving works. It might quite well be, that the current 
examples are borderline cases distracting from the real substance.

Defining a non-synchronous parthood instead of having a generalization 
with R10 (i.e., not conceived at some point in time to form together a 
logical whole) is a dangerous business, because it would be a complement.

I think this must be properly discussed.

All the best,

Martin


On 4/4/2022 6:08 AM, Pat Riva via Crm-sig wrote:
> Hello all yet again!
>
> Property R10 
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GgfF8Mi6EAduLyCBH9MZq4uSOX3C4sftnlKHUG-huWI/edit?usp=sharing> has 
> member (is member of) was discussed in October 2021, during SIG51. And 
> had been discussed a few times prior to that. However, no vote was 
> taken at SIG51 and the decision was deferred. We ran out of time to 
> return to the discussion during SIG52 in February. It is time to take 
> a vote and move on.
>
>
> The proposal is to deprecated R10 has member (is member of) which 
> relates two instances of F1 Work. This property is from FRBRoo where 
> it served to gather and link instances of F14 Individual Work into F15 
> Complex Works. All these subclasses of F1 Work have been deprecated in 
> LRMoo, and furthermore, R10 does not not correspond to any 
> relationship in LRMer.
>
>
> If the deprecation of R10 is accepted, then it is necessary to adjust 
> R67 has part (forms part of), linking an instance of F1 Work to a 
> larger instance of F1 Work, by removing the final paragraph and 
> modifying its superproperty.
>
>
> Vote *Yes* if you support deprecating R10 (and adjusting R67 in 
> consequence), vote*No* if you do not, preferably with an explanation. 
> Indicate *VETO* if you consider this issue needs to be discussed at a SIG.
>
>
> Please vote by *April 10* and I will summarize for the list.
>
>
> a) Current definition of R10 has member (is member of)
>
>
> Domain: _F1_Work
>
> Range: _F1_Work
>
> Superproperty of: _F1_Work. R67 has part (is part of): _F1_Work
>
> Subproperty of: _E89_Propositional Object. _P148_has component (is 
> component of): _E89_Propositional Object
>
> Quantification: many to many (0,n:0,n)
>
> Scope note: This property associates an instance of F1 Work with 
> another instance of F1 Work that forms a part of it. This property is 
> transitive. An instance of F1 Work may neither directly nor indirectly 
> be a member of itself. Instances of F1 Work that are not members of 
> one another may not share a common member.
>
>
>
> b) Current definition of R67 has part (forms part of)
>
> Domain: _F1_Work
>
> Range: _F1_Work
>
> Subproperty of: _F1_Work. R10 has member (is member of): _F1_Work
>
> Quantification: many to many (0,n:0,n)
>
> Scope note: This property associates an instance of F1 Work with 
> another instance of F1 Work that forms part of it in a complementary 
> role to other sibling parts, conceived at some point in time to form 
> together a logical whole, such as the parts of a trilogy. This 
> property is transitive.
>
> *In contrast, the property /R10 has member (is member of)/may, for 
> instance, also associate with the overall instance of F1 Work 
> translations, adaptations and other derivative works that do not form 
> a logical whole with sibling parts.*
>
>
> Changes for R67 if R10 is deprecated :
>
> a) Modify superproperty to be the superproperty of the deprecated R10:
>
> Subproperty of: _E89_Propositional Object. _P148_has component (is 
> component of): _E89_Propositional Object
>
> b) Delete the 2^nd paragraph of the scope note.
>
> In contrast, the property /R10 has member (is member of)/may, for 
> instance, also associate with the overall instance of F1 Work 
> translations, adaptations and other derivative works that do not form 
> a logical whole with sibling parts.
>
>
>
>
> Pat Riva
> Acting University Librarian / Bibliothécaire en chef par intérim
> Concordia University / Université Concordia
> 1455 de Maisonneuve West, LB-331
> Montréal, Québec H3G 1M8
> Canada
> pat.riva at concordia.ca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20220404/1f74d38f/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Crm-sig mailing list