In continuation:
"Sold", "completed", "incomplete" are very specific things. Objects are
offered for sale, which does not imply anything more than a sort of
publication. Actual purchase is a reaction on the offer. Purchase may
happen without offer. Actual change of ownership is modeled in the CRM.
The type of the event itself implies per default completion, such as
production, modification etc.
The interesting case are processes which are known to be abandoned, but
what that means needs further investigation: How much of action has been
done and left historical traces?
Processes which have not been finished during recording time are another
case. This is notoriously difficult, and resembles the "current"
discussions. We may need an "still ongoing", which should be harmonized
with the time-spans.
Unknown parameters of an event, such as purchase from unknown to
unknown, do not need a n "outcome" property, but are just a specific
event an object has experienced.
Isn't it?
Other kinds of "outcomes" can be modifications, obligations, receiving
knowledge of, transfer of properties between "input-output" etc. May be
it is time to study if we can create a relatively comprehensive list.
Some events may only leave memory as only persistent thing, e.g.
performances.
To be discussed!😁
Best,
Martin
On 12/31/2021 8:29 PM, Martin Doerr via Crm-sig wrote:
Dear All,
The missing property of outcome is so far deliberate in the CRM,
because we could not identify a general case. In contrast, there are
models with input-output semantics, but this is a very small subset.
As in all such cases, we first need a collection of examples, and
study if there exist common semantics, or if it splits in a set of
more specific cases. I'd expect about 5 kinds of outcomes. If you give
me the time, I can present in the next meeting some.
All the best,
Martin
On 12/20/2021 6:45 PM, George Bruseker via Crm-sig wrote:
Hi Thanasi,
The proposal creates a consistent way of doing the 'type of' version
of a property that relates one particular to another particular.
So each individual property:
https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P20-had-specific-purpose/version-7.1.1
has its typed version like:
https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P21-had-general-purpose/version-7.1.1
Right?
But I contend there IS NO particular property in regular CRM that
expresses the semantics I indicate above (therefore the
proposal cannot generate its typed version). P21 DOES NOT express the
semantics I need (hence also not P23).
O13 triggers more or less does. in particular. But I need the
generalization. Triggered an outcome of type.
Anyhow, not sure if anyone else needs this, but very common in my data.
Cheers,
G
On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 4:35 PM Athanasios Velios
<thana...@softicon.co.uk> wrote:
Following Athina's response and in relation to the question about
the
extant properties, I guess the "type of type" can be replicated with
thesaurus related properties (e.g. P127 has broader term). I would
consider the instances of E55 Type slightly differently to normal
instances and not extent the idea to them.
T.
On 14/12/2021 19:42, George Bruseker wrote:
> Hi Thanasi,
>
> Yes that's true. Good reminder. That might be a solution but
then we
> would need the particular property for expressing that two
events are
> causally connected. I avoided to put it in the last email so as
not to
> stir up to many semantic teapots. But obviously to have the
general
> property we should have the particular property. So we have for
example
> we have the particular properties:
>
>
https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P20-had-specific-purpose/version-7.1.1
>
<https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P20-had-specific-purpose/version-7.1.1>
> and
>
https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P21-had-general-purpose/version-7.1.1
>
<https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P21-had-general-purpose/version-7.1.1>
>
> so the analogy to this in my situation is probably
>
> O13 triggers (is triggered by)
>
https://cidoc-crm.org/crmsci/sites/default/files/CRMsci%20v.1.4.pdf
>
<https://cidoc-crm.org/crmsci/sites/default/files/CRMsci%20v.1.4.pdf>
> and we need the analogy of p21 to make the model complete....
>
> On another note out of curiosity, in the extension where every
property
> has a 'type of' property what happens with the extant 'type of'
> properties? I assume there isn't any has general purpose of type
> property... or is there?
>
> Cheers
>
> G
>
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 9:20 PM Athanasios Velios via Crm-sig
> <crm-sig@ics.forth.gr <mailto:crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>> wrote:
>
> Hi George, all,
>
> As part of Linked Conservation Data (and with the help of
Carlo, Martin
> and Steve) we proposed the idea of Typed Properties which
derive from
> current CRM properties and always have E55 Type as range.
>
> E.g. "bears feature" → "bears feature of type" so that one
can describe
> the type of something without specifying the individual. It
is very
> economical in conservation where we want to avoid describing
> hundreds of
> individuals of similar types.
>
> We are still baking the exact impact of such a reduction from
> individuals to Types. One issue in RDFS is the multitude of new
> properties. There seems to be a simple implementation in
OWL with
> property paths. Not an immediate solution but a flag for
more to come.
>
> All the best,
>
> Thanasis
>
> On 14/12/2021 15:49, George Bruseker via Crm-sig wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have situations in which I have events where the data
curators
> > describe events for which they have generic knowledge of the
> outcome:
> > sold, completed, incomplete, this sort of thing. So there is
> knowledge
> > but it is not knowledge of the particular next event but
of a
> general
> > kind of outcome.
> >
> > We have properties like: P21 had general purpose (was
purpose of)
> which
> > is very useful for when the data curator only has
generic knowledge
> > knowledge and not particular knowledge regarding
purpose. This
> seems a
> > parallel to this case.
> >
> > Anybody else have this case and have an interest in a
property
> like 'had
> > general outcome' or 'had outcome of type' that goes from
Event to a
> > Type? Or, better yet if possible, a solution that
doesn't involve
> a new
> > property but that does meet this semantic need without
too many
> contortions?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > George
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Crm-sig mailing list
> > Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
> > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
> <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Crm-sig mailing list
> Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
> <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
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
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
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
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
