Dear All,
I vote VETO.
Reason: The proposed scope note for R67 will still contain: "conceived
at some point in time to form together a logical whole". This means to
my opinion, that by deprecating R10, an instance of Work cannot evolve
over time into some subsets that, following one group of librarians,
form a Work in its own right, and following another group of librarians,
form only expressions of the same work. This implies absolute, global
decisions about instances of Work, rather breaking the ability to
integrate such points of view.
To my opinion, if we perceive the Work level as an aggregation point to
serve user interests, it must be relatively unconstrained to introduce a
work level. This was also argued for by Richard Smiraglia.
It would become even more complicated, when, e.g., a new series of R67
related sibling works would appear, because the two wholes can no more
form part of a "super" work, because the two were never "conceived at
some point in time to form together a logical whole".
Obviously, the Work construct, which admits an evolution like a living
body, but without loosing any shape it had in the past, cannot be
structured based on a simultaneity concept of parthood alone, as I have
argued repeatedly in the past. It must necessarily admit temporal parts
and synchronous parts, and all mixed forms of asynchronous strands.
This, to my memory, was the reason for designing R10, and not the
Individual-Complex Work relation only. I think there*must be reasonable*
examples proving that R67 alone will not be able to support more complex
forms of evolving works. It might quite well be, that the current
examples are borderline cases distracting from the real substance.
Defining a non-synchronous parthood instead of having a generalization
with R10 (i.e., not conceived at some point in time to form together a
logical whole) is a dangerous business, because it would be a complement.
I think this must be properly discussed.
All the best,
Martin
On 4/4/2022 6:08 AM, Pat Riva via Crm-sig wrote:
Hello all yet again!
Property R10
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GgfF8Mi6EAduLyCBH9MZq4uSOX3C4sftnlKHUG-huWI/edit?usp=sharing> has
member (is member of) was discussed in October 2021, during SIG51. And
had been discussed a few times prior to that. However, no vote was
taken at SIG51 and the decision was deferred. We ran out of time to
return to the discussion during SIG52 in February. It is time to take
a vote and move on.
The proposal is to deprecated R10 has member (is member of) which
relates two instances of F1 Work. This property is from FRBRoo where
it served to gather and link instances of F14 Individual Work into F15
Complex Works. All these subclasses of F1 Work have been deprecated in
LRMoo, and furthermore, R10 does not not correspond to any
relationship in LRMer.
If the deprecation of R10 is accepted, then it is necessary to adjust
R67 has part (forms part of), linking an instance of F1 Work to a
larger instance of F1 Work, by removing the final paragraph and
modifying its superproperty.
Vote *Yes* if you support deprecating R10 (and adjusting R67 in
consequence), vote*No* if you do not, preferably with an explanation.
Indicate *VETO* if you consider this issue needs to be discussed at a SIG.
Please vote by *April 10* and I will summarize for the list.
a) Current definition of R10 has member (is member of)
Domain: _F1_Work
Range: _F1_Work
Superproperty of: _F1_Work. R67 has part (is part of): _F1_Work
Subproperty of: _E89_Propositional Object. _P148_has component (is
component of): _E89_Propositional Object
Quantification: many to many (0,n:0,n)
Scope note: This property associates an instance of F1 Work with
another instance of F1 Work that forms a part of it. This property is
transitive. An instance of F1 Work may neither directly nor indirectly
be a member of itself. Instances of F1 Work that are not members of
one another may not share a common member.
b) Current definition of R67 has part (forms part of)
Domain: _F1_Work
Range: _F1_Work
Subproperty of: _F1_Work. R10 has member (is member of): _F1_Work
Quantification: many to many (0,n:0,n)
Scope note: This property associates an instance of F1 Work with
another instance of F1 Work that forms part of it in a complementary
role to other sibling parts, conceived at some point in time to form
together a logical whole, such as the parts of a trilogy. This
property is transitive.
*In contrast, the property /R10 has member (is member of)/may, for
instance, also associate with the overall instance of F1 Work
translations, adaptations and other derivative works that do not form
a logical whole with sibling parts.*
Changes for R67 if R10 is deprecated :
a) Modify superproperty to be the superproperty of the deprecated R10:
Subproperty of: _E89_Propositional Object. _P148_has component (is
component of): _E89_Propositional Object
b) Delete the 2^nd paragraph of the scope note.
In contrast, the property /R10 has member (is member of)/may, for
instance, also associate with the overall instance of F1 Work
translations, adaptations and other derivative works that do not form
a logical whole with sibling parts.
Pat Riva
Acting University Librarian / Bibliothécaire en chef par intérim
Concordia University / Université Concordia
1455 de Maisonneuve West, LB-331
Montréal, Québec H3G 1M8
Canada
pat.r...@concordia.ca
_______________________________________________
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