Hi Dan,
The "PCXXX" classes are exactly the suitable formalism you ask for.,
graph-topologically equivalent to the reification.
We must not confuse the syntactic pattern, which is the same for the
PCXXX solution, the annotation
and the reification, with the intended meaning ;-) .
Cheers,
Martin
On 3/2/2016 8:58 μμ, Dan Matei wrote:
Despite the fact that I'm always told that reification is not recomanded, I decided to
"piser contre le vent" :-)
Functionally, the reification is just natural. Proof: the "invention" of .1
properties in CRM.
Aaa, if the formalisms we have do not handle it well, please invent a suitable
formalism, my dear friends.
Dan
------------------------------------------------------------------
Dan Matei
consultant (documentaristică, biblioteci digitale),
Fundația Gellu Naum,
[Institutul Național al Patrimoniului]
-----Original Message-----
From: martin <mar...@ics.forth.gr>
To: crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 20:09:26 +0200
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] Modelling .1 properties
Dear Simon,
Our messages crossed, your analysis is correct! We have discussed
however, that reification or annotation is not recommended, rather an
introduction of a node (class) representing a triary property rather than
an individual entity. From the existence of an instance of
PC14_carried_out_by we can automatically infer
the instance of P14, as described in the formalization.
All the best,
martin
On 3/2/2016 7:55 μμ, Simon Spero wrote:
The first order formalization given in the crm document are:
P14(x,y,z) ⊃ [P14(x,y) ∧ E55(z)]
Note that the predicate on the left hand side has three arguments,
which is more arguments than rdf is comfortable with.
The "in the role of" property is modifying an instance of a "carried
out by" property.
An activity can be carried out by several different agents, each in a
different role, so the property cannot be attached directly to the
activity.
There are several possible ways of representing this using semantic
web tools.
The first approach is to use RDF reification. I am not going to say
anything more about this.
If you are using OWL 2, you can add an annotation each "carried out
by" property assertion. This is not ideal, as annotations are not
really supposed to be part of the data in the model, and most
reasoners ignore them. They are also not easy to work with in RDF.
A third approach is to define your own class for reification,
representing an instance of a "carrying out" ; this class would have
properties relating the activity, the agent, and the role.
The best approach may be to define a sub property of P14 for each type
of carrying out in a role which is relevant to your model.
You can specify the role associated with all uses of this property
using a property whose subject is the subproperty.
Simon
On Feb 3, 2016 10:01 AM, "Allison Miller"
<allison.mil...@sysemia.co.uk <mailto:allison.mil...@sysemia.co.uk>>
wrote:
Hello,
I wish to use the CIDOC CRM but need a formal model to do so and
have a question concerning .1 properties.
eg. E7 Activity has: P14 carried out by (performed): E39 Actor and
(P14.1 in the role of: E55 Type)
It is a property I need to use - but I can’t work out how to model it!
I thought I could use the Erlangen OWL implementation, but I can’t
find these properties in it. (That’s not to claim they aren’t
there, my knowledge of OWL is limited.)
I would welcome any guidance on P14.1, and other .1 properties, in
the Erlangen implementation, or advice on including them in a
definition compatible with Semantic Web technologies if anyone has
done this.
Kind regards,
Alli
E-mail: allison.mil...@sysemia.co.uk
<mailto:allison.mil...@sysemia.co.uk>
Web: www.sysemia.com <http://www.sysemia.com/>
Sysemia Limited
The Innovation Centre, Bristol & Bath Science Park, Dirac
Crescent, Emerson's Green, Bristol BS16 7FR
Registered in England and Wales. Company Number: 7555456
DISCLAIMER
Information contained in this e-mail is intended for the use of
the addressee only, and is confidential and may also be
privileged. If you receive this message in error, please advise us
immediately. If you are not the intended recipient(s), please note
that any form of distribution, copying or use of this
communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and
may be unlawful. Attachments to this e-mail may contain software
viruses which may damage your systems. Sysemia Ltd have taken
reasonable steps to minimise this risk, but we advise that any
attachments are virus checked before they are opened.
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
_______________________________________________
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
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
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 |
--------------------------------------------------------------
