Have not yet applied it to LRMoo, but it should work.
I have a question about the list of external properties: in FRBRoo this list included the domains and ranges in the table. I have found that helpful. Is the format of the table perscriptive?


Pat Riva

Associate University Librarian, Collection Services (on leave)

Concordia University


Vanier Library (VL-301-61)

7141 Sherbrooke Street West

Montreal, QC H4B 1R6


From: Crm-sig <> on behalf of Francesco Beretta via Crm-sig <>
Sent: June 21, 2021 4:51 PM
To: <>
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] E-vote for issue 384 (template for family models)


Le 21.06.21 15:47, George Bruseker via Crm-sig a crit :

On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 4:24 PM yvind Eide via Crm-sig <> wrote:

Am 18.06.2021 um 11:56 schrieb Athanasios Velios via Crm-sig <>:

Dear all,

This issue is about agreeing a template based on which the specification documents of CRM family models will be produced. The working document for this issue is here:

The proposed template is here:

The vote is to decide on whether to adopt the template document. The main change from the existing template is the inclusion of a table for class and property dependencies to allow clear references to other models without repeating material and while keeping track of different versions.

The possible votes are:

  • Yes = accept/agree
  • No = do not accept/agree
  • Other = With other you can either introduce a caveat (e.g.: 'Yes, but there is a typo on word x, fix it.') or you can write VETO, if you wish to stop the proposal, in which case you should also write a justification and reformulate the issue (e.g.: 'VETO, this change is unacceptable because it violates the following principle...')

Please send your e-votes by the 28th of June.

All the best,


Crm-sig mailing list

Crm-sig mailing list

Crm-sig mailing list