Dear George, To my understanding (without having been involved in the relevant discussions about having the E33_E41 class in the RDFS but not in CRM), and according to the discussion in issue 363 <https://cidoc-crm.org/Issue/ID-363-form-and-persistence-of-rdf-identifiers> , classes that use to co-occur on things simultaneously without being associated with properties only applicable to the combination of such classes, are not modelled individually as subclasses of multiple parent classes (a principle used for keeping the ontology compact).
The 'E35 Title' class exists because there is a property 'P102 has title' (of E71 Human-Made Thing) that needs to point to something that is both a linguistic object and an appellation. So, for having a CRM class "E? Linguistic Appellation", there should be a property that needs to point to something that is both a linguistic object and an appellation (and with the intended meaning), e.g. a 'has linguistic appellation' property for E39 Actor or E77 Persistent Item. To my understanding, since there is no such property, there is (currently) no need to introduce such a class in CRM. Best, Pavlos On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 12:50 PM George Bruseker via Crm-sig < crm-sig@ics.forth.gr> wrote: > It's not really though. In the majority of cases when you talk about a > name you need to talk about a language too. Especially if CRM wants to be > inclusive etc. We have a subclass 'title' of appellation that does allow > but it only works for inanimate objects. So it is useless as a general > case. The use of E33_E41 should be a default in most modelling cases with > E41 being the exception (mostly names are in a language). The general idea > of a name in a language is not an arcane concept, but the majority concept. > Needing to use an arcane construct either E33_E41 or multi instantiation > for the majority case when the standard could just provide the appropriate > class and document it and allow people to build around it, would be a > superior way to go imho. > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 12:04 PM stead...@outlook.com <stead...@outlook.com> > wrote: > >> Surely the RDFS E33_E41 is just a workaround for a common multiple >> instantiation that is problematic in RDFS land not a need for a new class. >> >> >> >> *From:* Crm-sig <crm-sig-boun...@ics.forth.gr> *On Behalf Of *George >> Bruseker via Crm-sig >> *Sent:* 07 November 2022 15:58 >> *To:* Elias Tzortzakakis <tzort...@ics.forth.gr> >> *Cc:* Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr >> *Subject:* Re: [Crm-sig] error in RDFS for 7.1.1 for the class that is a >> subclass of E41 and E33 >> >> >> >> Thank Elias, >> >> >> >> You are definitely right that it is ok in the actual doc but mis >> referenced in the xml commentary. My point is not that the RDFS is wrong >> and it is great that it is produced and solid. I am more interested in how >> NOT having legitimate classes in the standard but compromising and just >> putting them in RDFS means that a) we create all sorts of arcana around >> what should be an open standard and b) because the class is not documented >> in the specification document we don't actually have a rule to know what is >> should be called. >> >> >> >> So it's more a process and principles level issue. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> >> George >> >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 5:29 PM Elias Tzortzakakis <tzort...@ics.forth.gr> >> wrote: >> >> Dear George, >> >> >> >> The rdfs defines 1 such class using just 1 name the >> ‘E33_E41_Linguistic_Appellation’. >> >> The second name reference you are referring to >> ‘E41_E33_Linguistic_Appellation’ exists only in the XML comments of the >> rdfs file. >> >> >> >> There has been a discussion and decision about the correct order. >> >> Please see issue >> https://cidoc-crm.org/Issue/ID-555-rdfs-implementation-and-related-issues >> and search for post starting with In the 51st CIDOC CRM & 44th FRBRoo SIG >> meeting >> >> *Decision*: keeping numbers of the numeric identifier in order. >> >> >> >> Thus the rdfs is valid and consistent but the comment lines should also >> definitely be adapted to this decision. >> >> Thanks for spotting, >> >> >> >> I will correct this ASAP, >> >> >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Elias Tzortzakakis >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Crm-sig <crm-sig-boun...@ics.forth.gr> *On Behalf Of *George >> Bruseker via Crm-sig >> *Sent:* Monday, November 7, 2022 5:02 PM >> *To:* crm-sig <Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr> >> *Subject:* [Crm-sig] error in RDFS for 7.1.1 for the class that is a >> subclass of E41 and E33 >> >> >> >> Dear all, >> >> >> >> There are two references to the class that is a subclass of E41 and E33 >> that allows you to talk about the language of a name (which is a super >> common requirement... actually almost always necessary). I can't give you >> it's official name because I dont know because it isn't in the spec doc and >> it doesn't have ONE name in the RDFS. >> >> >> >> In one reference it is called: E41_E33_Linguistic_Appellation and then >> later it is called E33_E41_Linguistic_Appellation. Try find f in the rdfs >> doc and you will what I mean. >> >> >> >> https://cidoc-crm.org/rdfs/7.1.1/CIDOC_CRM_v7.1.1.rdfs >> >> >> >> >> >> Actually I don't care what it is called, but it would be nice if it was >> really, really clear. >> >> >> >> I think this speaks against the practice of hiding classes we don't like >> and call implementation classes in the RDFS and should make them full >> classes in the standard so that they are fully vetted and controlled. It is >> a fundamental class. It should be in the standard in the first place. >> >> >> >> And definitely it should not have two different name in the RDFS. Can we >> confirm that it is supposed to be E33_E41 and not E41_E33? >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> >> George >> >> >> >> -- >> >> George Bruseker, PhD >> >> Chief Executive Officer >> >> Takin.solutions Ltd. >> >> https://www.takin.solutions/ >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> George Bruseker, PhD >> >> Chief Executive Officer >> >> Takin.solutions Ltd. >> >> https://www.takin.solutions/ >> > > > -- > George Bruseker, PhD > Chief Executive Officer > Takin.solutions Ltd. > https://www.takin.solutions/ > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing list > Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig > -- Pavlos Fafalios Postdoctoral researcher (Marie Curie IF - Project ReKnow <https://reknow.ics.forth.gr/>) Centre for Cultural Informatics & Information Systems Laboratory Institute of Computer Science - FORTH Visiting Lecturer Department of Management Science & Technology Hellenic Mediterranean University Web: http://users.ics.forth.gr/~fafalios/ Email: fafal...@ics.forth.gr Address: N. Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton, 70013 Heraklion, Greece Tel: +30-2810-391619
_______________________________________________ Crm-sig mailing list Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
