There is generally no problem with reification qua reification!
The CRM is committed to reification in its model of actions and events. See
Davidson's "The Logical Form of Action Sentences" [1] for the paper that
made this approach dominant. It's worth a read.
The collection "Essays on Action and Events" [2] collects other related
papers; for commentary see [3] - mostly for Quine's essay on identity
conditions for events to which Davidson is replying in the second edition
of [2]. Identity is one of the things that requires consideration when
considering reification.
-----
What is usually being objected to specifically is "RDF reification".
This facility consists of a class called rdf:Statement, together with the
properties - subject, predicate, and object.
The mechanism that is provided is pretty awful.
Here is a reified statement.
_:x a rdf:Statement,
rdf:subject :foo,
rdf:predicate :property,
rdf:object :bar .
This does *not* entail
:foo :property :bar.
--------
[1] http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic638346.files/Davidson1967.pdf
[2]
http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0199246270.001.0001/acprof-9780199246274
[3]
https://books.google.com/books/about/Actions_and_Events.html?id=Tjl6QgAACAAJ&source=kp_cover
On Feb 3, 2016 2:02 PM, "Dan Matei" <d...@cimec.ro> 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
>
