Dear All,

Continuing the question from my last message below:

Very large strings one would normally describe in a file and instantiate E90 Symbolic Object or a subclass of it with the URL. However, the question is, if the URL would indeed be a good persistent identifier, since the URL stands for a physical location, albeit indirectly addressed. The Linked Open Data community has not yet given satisfactory answers for the long term validity of resolvable URIs. If the URL is not a good identifier, another, primary URI should be chosen, and the content found in the URL should be related to the primary URI as a representative of the content of the symbolic object identified with the primary URI.

I would like to discuss a new property,

PXXX has content representation
domain: E90 Symbolic Object
range:     E90 Symbolic Object

Tentative scope note:
Scope note: This property associates an instance of E90 Symbolic Object with another instance of E90 Symbolic Object (or any of its subclasses) that represents completely the content of the former identically concerning the the symbol set  in which the former is defined and nothing more. For instance, a text of Aristotle may be defined in terms of the ancient Greek alphabet, paragraphs and section titles, but the representing object may use some type phases and page layout. Metadata in the range instance are not regarded as part of the content.

What about introductions, foot notes etc.?

Can someone make a scenario with a real canonical instance of a text of Aristotle or Platon, with indexed phrases, and propose how the text itself should be identified, possibly independent from spelling variants?

Another case: I submit to Springer a paper in .doc and they create a pdf, and a Journal image. How do we define "my paper" regardless these embodiments??

In the worst case, we would need yet another node in order to specify the part of the file that is the defining text.

Further, P165 incorporates is from information object to symbolic object, hence not compatible.

Another argument being, that an ontological link from E90 to E90 doesn't make sense. If the target should be a URL, we may regard this as an implementation level question.



On 11/6/2018 4:46 PM, Martin Doerr wrote:
Dear All,

I had sent the below as new issue, but it is indeed the answer to Issue 383.

The question is, how to deal with a file, which is more specific in content, such as an MS Word, but represents the character sequence that defines the content of the respective E90. Is is "is incorporated in", or a subproperty of it?

On 9/19/2018 11:09 PM, Martin Doerr wrote:
Here my scope note:

Pxxx has symbolic content

Domain:             E90 Symbolic Object

Range:                E62 String

Quantification:    many to many (0,n:0,n) ??

 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