Hi Robert,

The E78  Collection changed name (which of course does not mean anything since 
the name of a class is just a label and the definition is given by the scope 
note.) to E78 Curated Holding a year ago (issue 270 resolved in Prato February 
2016). The CRM 6.2.2 is not completely updated - unfortunately. 

The crucial point is: Can an instance of E78 Curated Holding consist of stuff 
(to use the old term) that is not moved and cannot be moved.  The first 
sentence of the scope note indicates that a curated holding consists of things 
that are assembled and thus moved (demonstrating that they are physical 
objects). 

"This class comprises aggregations of instances of E18 Physical Thing that are 
assembled..."

If this is the case, one may argue that any assembly of physical objects is in 
itself a physical object. On the other hand there may well be a open air museum 
where the collection consists of log houses placed in different locations (say, 
1 kilometer apart) but curated collectively. It may be somewhat artificial to 
model such a collection as a single physical object.

However, I agree that the word 'assembled' may cause confusions.  If you agree 
that my collection of log houses should not be modeled as a single physical 
object, could you suggest a better formulation in the scope note?

Best
Christian-Emil

********************************************
E78 Curated Holding
Subclass of:    E24 Physical Man-Made Thing

Scope note:     This class comprises aggregations of instances of E18 Physical 
Thing that are assembled and maintained (“curated” and “preserved,” in 
museological terminology) by one or more instances of E39 Actor over time for a 
specific purpose and audience, and according to a particular collection 
development plan.  Typical instances of curated holdings are museum 
collections, archives, library holdings and digital libraries. A digital 
library is regarded as an instance of E18 Physical Thing because it requires 
keeping physical carriers of the electronic content.

Items may be added or removed from an E78 Curated Holding in pursuit of this 
plan. This class should not be confused with the E39 Actor maintaining the E78 
Curated Holding often referred to with the name of the E78 Curated Holding 
(e.g. “The Wallace Collection decided…”). 


Collective objects in the general sense, like a tomb full of gifts, a folder 
with stamps or a set of chessmen, should be documented as instances of E19 
Physical Object, and not as instances of E78 Curated Holding. This is because 
they form wholes either because they are physically bound together or because 
they are kept together for their functionality.

Examples:       
       the John Clayton Herbarium
       the Wallace Collection
       Mikael Heggelund Foslie’s coralline red algae Herbarium at Museum of 
Natural History and Archaeology, Trondheim, Norway


**********************************************

E19 Physical Object
Subclass of:    E18 Physical Thing
Superclass of:  E20 Biological Object
E22 Man-Made Object

Scope note:     This class comprises items of a material nature that are units 
for documentation and have physical boundaries that separate them completely in 
an objective way from other objects. 

The class also includes all aggregates of objects made for functional purposes 
of whatever kind, independent of physical coherence, such as a set of chessmen. 
Typically, instances of E19 Physical Object can be moved (if not too heavy).

In some contexts, such objects, except for aggregates, are also called “bona 
fide objects” (Smith & Varzi, 2000, pp.401-420), i.e. naturally defined 
objects. 

The decision as to what is documented as a complete item, rather than by its 
parts or components, may be a purely administrative decision or may be a result 
of the order in which the item was acquired.
Examples: 
       John Smith
       Aphrodite of Milos
       the Palace of Knossos
       the Cullinan Diamond 
       Apollo 13 at the time of launch
*****************************************************

________________________________________
From: Crm-sig <crm-sig-boun...@ics.forth.gr> on behalf of Robert Sanderson 
<rsander...@getty.edu>
Sent: 14 April 2017 04:20
To: 'crm-sig'
Subject: [Crm-sig] E78 Collection vs E19 Physical Object

Dear all,

A question completely unrelated to states, I promise (

E78 Collection is described as:  “This class comprises aggregations of 
instances of E18 Physical Thing that are assembled and maintained …”
And E19 Physical Object’s scope note says:  “The class also includes *all* 
aggregates of objects made for functional purposes of *whatever kind*, …”
(emphasis added)

However E78 is not a descendant of E19 … they are both independent descendants 
of E18.

So every E78 Collection must also be, explicitly, an E19 Physical Object?  This 
seems like a bug in the class hierarchy?

And regardless of the hierarchy, if there is a set of objects that are not 
“physically bound together or […] kept together for their functionality” (hence 
not E19), but do not have a “particular collection development plan” (hence not 
E78 either) … how should they be modeled?  Examples include auction lots, the 
set of objects that are looked after by an art dealer (but without a 
development plan), and similar.

Many thanks!

Rob



_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig

Reply via email to