Dear Robert,
On 2/23/2019 1:54 AM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
Dear all,
To make certain that I understand the distinctions being drawn by
applying Phase and State to the use cases I sent during the SIG
meeting in November, they fall into the categories in my email of
social state and physical phase (a good mnemonic for which is which!):
* Ownership – initiated and terminated by an Acquisition, expresses
the temporal validity of has_current_owner
(and similarly custody of the object)
This is a binary temporal relationship between an actor (the owner)
and a thing (the object), and thus a Social State.
Yes!
* Identification / Naming -- temporal validity of a
P1_is_identified_by between something and an Identifier
This is a ternary temporal relationship between an actor (the namer),
a thing (the named object), and an appellation (the name).
Similarly valuation, but to a Monetary Amount instead of an
Appellation. This is very similar to AttributeAssignment, but with
temporal qualities.
We use an "Name Use Activity" in the FRBR model. To be discussed how a
formal assignment of a name relates to actually using it.
* Usage -- a thing was used in a particular way (e.g. a building was a
church, then a restaurant)
That's activity based. To be discussed. This pertains to subtle
distinctions between intentions and factual reality, and to which degree
there is a unity in activities making use of something. It also touches
questions of modelling collective behaviour.
An actor (the Group that uses it), a thing (the building), and a Type
(the sort of usage)
* Profession, Gender, Nationality (and other classifications) of a Person
These don’t fall into the current definition as there’s no Thing
involved other than the Person? Or is the person the “thing”, and the
society is the Actor?
Profession and nationality as a formal, contractual thing would be a
social binding.
Then my two physical cases, which are Phases:
* Change of dimensions – The Night Watch was cut down in 1715. This is
observable and thus continues to be valid with the addition to the
scope note.
Yes.
* Existence – Picasso’s Le Peintre exists from its production in 1963
until 1998, when its Destruction was caused by the crash of Swissair
Flight 111. In between there is a Phase when the painting observably
existed..
Well, to be discussed. The overall existence of something to regard as a
phase is like regarding my computer as a part of itself. For me, a thing
simply is, and begin and end of existence are parameters. If we model it
as an E92, it has a simple temporal projection.
I'd argue that "existence" as a distinct ontological entity is not
useful, but I may be wrong;-)
Best,
Martin
Right?
Rob
*From: *Crm-sig <crm-sig-boun...@ics.forth.gr> on behalf of Martin
Doerr <mar...@ics.forth.gr>
*Date: *Wednesday, February 20, 2019 at 12:46 PM
*To: *"crm-sig@ics.forth.gr" <crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
*Subject: *Re: [Crm-sig] Issue 369, Phase
Dear All,
Tentatively here an extension of my previous scope note. If it becomes
more controversial, we may drop it:
Exxx Phase
Subclass of: E2 Temporal Entity
Superclass of: E3 Condition State
Scope note: This class comprises phases during the existence and
evolution of an instance of E18 Physical Thing characterized by a
substantial appearance, constitution or a behavior distinct from that
in other times of its existence, or distinct in the evolution of
things of comparable kind, such as the nestling, fledgling, juvenile
and adult forms of birds, but some kinds of phases may also be
consequence of incidental changes such as accidents.
*Begin and ending of an instance of ExxxPhase is regarded to be
observable, regardless how fuzzy they are, by the contrast of the
prevailing conditions that characterize the phase to the times before
and after. It is the kind of phase that determines which kinds of
conditions identify it. Different kinds of phases may overlap on the
same instance of E18 Physical Thing. Non-substantial properties, such
as being owner of something, do not justify a phase*.
Best,
Martin
On 2/19/2019 8:21 PM, Martin Doerr wrote:
Dear Thanasi,
On 2/19/2019 7:13 PM, Athanasios Velios wrote:
Thank you Francesco and Martin for articulating my question
properly. I
can understand that we can already deal with the fuzzy temporal
boundaries of a phase. Martin's "observable properties" makes
it clearer
for me and perhaps it is worth emphasising in the scope note.
1) Examples of observable properties in conservation:
* "pitting" is a type of damage on metals where small pits are
formed on
the surface filled with metal salts and oxides. The existence of
white/light green powder in localised spots on copper is one
property to
help observe pitting.
So the surface enters a phase of developing pitting?
* "not functional" is what we call machines in industrial
heritage
collections which used to perform a function, such as a printing
machine, but they no longer do because they are broken. The
observable
property is that the machine has the capacity to print paper.
Yes
2) However, thinking about this further (and I hope I am not
going into
circles) I am struggling to articulate the differences between
Phase and
E3 Condition State. They both apply to E18 Physical Thing.
Martin says
in an email on 22/11/2018 that "Phase is like Condition State
bound to
the evolution of a thing". This sounds like it should be a
sub-class of
Condition State, i.e. states that are only related to evolution.
Francesco, if I understood correctly, refers to change of
state also for
non E18 Physical Things, i.e. epistemological as well as
phenomenal (is
this correct Francesco?).
I meant "Phase" to be superclass of Condition State. I wrote "but
some kinds of phases may also be consequence of incidental changes
such as accidents." to make clear that it is not only evolution.
3) I propose to change the first sentence of the scope note from:
"This class comprises phases during the existence..."
to:
"This class comprises temporal spans(?) during the existence..."
to avoid saying that a "Phase is a phase".
Yes, I know I made something nearly cyclic here, but I narrowed a
general notion of phase very much down by the following
conditions. I was tempted to write time span in order to avoid
"phase", but I have the impression that would come too close to
the epistemological point of view of arbitrariness. If we talk
about a "phase", I at least imply much more of a substantial
coherence within the phase. Indeed, the comments we received so
far suggest that "phase" in the linguistic sense is a much wider
concept.
We could add and adjective to my definition to make it clearer,
but I found no good adjective either (material? substantial?
behavioural? all seems to be more special).
All the best,
Martin
All the best,
Thanasis
On 19/02/2019 11:12, Martin Doerr wrote:
Dear Thanasi,
I understand. This may need more elaboration. The type of
the phase
determines the characteristic observable properties. We
should see
examples.
These properties may begin and end fuzzily, but that does
not affect the
concept, as long as inner-outer bounds can be assigned.
Best,
martin
On 2/18/2019 11:38 PM, Athanasios Velios wrote:
I like this scope note but my only concern is that an
observer cannot
tell when one phase ends and the next one begins. How
can we explain
that a phase is no longer?
All the best,
Thanasis
On 17/02/2019 19:44, Martin Doerr wrote:
Dear All,
Here a first attempt to define "phase":
Exxx Phase
Subclass of: E2 Temporal Entity
Superclass of:E3 Condition State
Scope note:This class comprises phases during the
existence and
evolution of an instance of E18 Physical Thing
characterized by an
appearance, constitution or a behavior distinct
from that in other times
of its existence, or distinct in the evolution of
things of comparable
kind, such as the nestling, fledgling, juvenile
and adult forms of
birds, but some kinds of phases may also be
consequence of incidental
changes such as accidents.
Best,
Martin
--
------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr
Honorary Head of the
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
Vox:+30(2810)391625
Email:mar...@ics.forth.gr
<mailto:Email:mar...@ics.forth.gr>
Web-site:http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
This email and any attachments are intended solely for
the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you are
not the intended
recipient of this email and/or its attachments you
must not take any
action based upon them and you must not copy or show
them to anyone.
Please send the email back to us and immediately and
permanently
delete it and its attachments. Where this email is
unrelated to the
business of University of the Arts London or of any of
its group
companies the opinions expressed in it are the
opinions of the sender
and do not necessarily constitute those of University
of the Arts
London (or the relevant group company). Where the
sender's signature
indicates that the email is sent on behalf of UAL
Short Courses
Limited the following also applies: UAL Short Courses
Limited is a
company registered in England and Wales under company
number 02361261.
Registered Office: University of the Arts London, 272
High Holborn,
London WC1V 7EY
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
This email and any attachments are intended solely for the
addressee and may contain confidential information. If you are
not the intended recipient of this email and/or its
attachments you must not take any action based upon them and
you must not copy or show them to anyone. Please send the
email back to us and immediately and permanently delete it and
its attachments. Where this email is unrelated to the business
of University of the Arts London or of any of its group
companies the opinions expressed in it are the opinions of the
sender and do not necessarily constitute those of University
of the Arts London (or the relevant group company). Where the
sender's signature indicates that the email is sent on behalf
of UAL Short Courses Limited the following also applies: UAL
Short Courses Limited is a company registered in England and
Wales under company number 02361261. Registered Office:
University of the Arts London, 272 High Holborn, London WC1V 7EY
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
--
------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr
Honorary Head of the
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
Vox:+30(2810)391625
Email:mar...@ics.forth.gr <mailto:mar...@ics.forth.gr>
Web-site:http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
--
------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr
Honorary Head of the
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
Vox:+30(2810)391625
Email: mar...@ics.forth.gr
Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
