YES On 01/11/2022 09:53, George Bruseker via Crm-sig wrote: > Dear all, > > I propose the deletion of the following classes of CRMdig. The reason > that each should be deleted is listed beside it, but there are two > basic, principled reasons for the proposal: > > 1) the class can be modelled using a more generic pattern from CRMbase > or CRMdig without loss of semantic valence > 2) the class violates a CIDOC CRM modelling principle / best practice, > an alternative mode of expressing it already exists using standard > modelling in CRM and SHOULD be employed > > Therefore, if our proposal is done correctly removing all these > classes will serve to a) make the model lighter but just as > semantically powerful, b) accord with CRM SIG general modelling > principles and c) serve better as a middle level domain ontology for its area > of scope. > > Martin Doerr, Rob Sanderson and Nicola Carboni have all contributed > over time to this review or properties alongside myself as proposer. > Any mistakes being mine. > > With that as background here are the proposed deletions: > > *D21 Person Name*: Obvious reasons. We already have a general E41 > Appellation class and we do not specialize name classes endlessly but > use the p2 has type formulation. > > *D23 Room*: Convenience class that is in fact not that convenient: use > E53 Place > > This is a first list to which others may be added. At this time, I am > happy to propose the above list for deletion as hopefully relatively > uncontroversial. > > You can find the specification for CRMdig here: > https://cidoc-crm.org/crmdig/sites/default/files/CRMdig_v3.2.1.pdf > <https://cidoc-crm.org/crmdig/sites/default/files/CRMdig_v3.2.1.pdf> > > To read more on these classes. > > There are other problematic classes which need to be reanalyzed before > they are considered for deletion or reworking. Separate issues will be > raised for each of these as necessary. > > I call a vote now, ending on Nov 11. Please vote by answering YES to > this emaill thread if you agree to these deletions or NO. If you vote > NO, please indicate if you vote NO to all or if you vote NO to some > part of the proposal. > > Thanks in advance for your interest and participation. > > Best, > > George > Vice Chair CRM SIG > > -- > George Bruseker, PhD > Chief Executive Officer > Takin.solutions Ltd. > https://www.takin.solutions/ <https://www.takin.solutions/> > > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing list > 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
_______________________________________________ Crm-sig mailing list Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
