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:
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:
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:
Domain: E90 Symbolic
Quantification: many to many
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,