Dear Martin, I slightly disagree. You cannot put the burden of the identity criteria of the E18 on P49, which simply associates the E18 to its custodian. Of course, if E18 ceases to exist (as such), there is no issue and nothing to keep in custody.
The matter of the identity criteria is slippery. Simon’s Ferrari would exist and perhaps (P49) have a custodian, according to the law as regards civil responsibility, in this case identity relates to the permanence of the chassis number; as a collectible, the identity criteria might be totally different, probably requiring requiring original pieces. Theseus’ ship identity depends on the regulations of the Ship Registry of Athens in the 3rd century BC, or whenever it was. Cutlery - which is **possibly** an E78 collection - is again different. Think of a set of glasses that are more subject to changes compared with metal spoons and forks: you start with 12, then they break, one tonight, another one tomorrow, and so on. For how long would you consider them a set and not just spare glasses? So, don’t ask poor P49 to help, it is an overwhelming task for it. Franco Prof Franco Niccolucci Director, VAST-LAB PIN - U. of Florence Scientific Coordinator ARIADNE - PARTHENOS Piazza Ciardi 25 59100 Prato, Italy > Il giorno 05/ott/2015, alle ore 19:47, martin <mar...@ics.forth.gr> ha > scritto: > > Dear Simon, > > Your argument well taken, I hope I have not been misunderstood: In the case > of the 12 spoons, forks, and knives, one may argue that as long as the > majority of parts is in the hands of the curator, he has keept it, even if > every piece has temporarily left his hands. This is different from marking > the chassis. One could even allow for all parts being exchanged, if the > object's identity is defined respectively. I'd regard these as different ways > to define a representative part. I believe they are all acceptable, as long > as they do not come in conflict with the natural concept of identity of the > object, and do not cause ambiguity about who has the object and who the > parts. With the cutlery, indeed someone could be regarded keeper of the > whole, and all parts dissapearing into different hands, leaving the keeper of > the whole with nothing in his hands. I think this should be avoided. Does > that make > sense? > > Cheers, > > Martin > > On 5/10/2015 7:07 μμ, Simon Spero wrote: >> I would argue that the extreme case is not the set of cutlery, but the Ship >> of Theseus- or more practically, the Car of Enzo. >> >> For models such as the 250 GTO, it is very much the provenance in >> association with the chassis number that determine the identity over time. >> >> If a vehicle is crashed, then restored without a transfer of custody, any >> application of the new scope note may be post hoc. >> >> Simon >> >> On Oct 5, 2015 10:13 AM, "martin" <mar...@ics.forth.gr> wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> Issue: >> P49: >> >> This shortcut supposes the existence of at least one representative part >> standing physically for the whole. Discuss knowledge revision process if a >> piece taken to be the representative of the whole must be regarded piece of >> another. Things kept may have parts in other hands. >> >> A comment should be stated. Steve, MD, Athinak should think together >> >> >> I propose the scope note addition: >> >> Scope note: This property identifies the E39 Actor or Actors who have >> or have had custody of an instance of E18 Physical Thing at some time. This >> property leaves open the question if parts of this physical thing have been >> added or removed during the time-spans it has been under the custody of this >> actor, but it is required that at least a part which can unambiguously be >> identified as representing the whole has been under this custody for its >> whole time. For instance, in the extreme case of a set of cutlery we may >> require the majority of pieces having been in the hands of the actor. >> >> >> Best, >> Martin >> >> -- >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >> Dr. Martin Doerr | Vox:+30(2810)391625 | >> Research Director | Fax:+30(2810)391638 | >> | Email: >> mar...@ics.forth.gr >> | >> | >> 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 | >> | >> Web-site: >> http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl >> | >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Crm-sig mailing list >> Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr >> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >> > > > -- > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Dr. Martin Doerr | Vox:+30(2810)391625 | > Research Director | Fax:+30(2810)391638 | > | Email: > mar...@ics.forth.gr > | > | > 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 | > | > Web-site: > http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl > | > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing list > Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
