B: Typo: P125 should be P125.1 in the bold phrase.
"The implication from the long path to the shortcut is ok since the shortcut has no .1-property. The implication from the shortcut to the long path is problematic since there is a .1-property in the long path. It is possible to imagine that the shortcut could have a P125.1 mode of use:E55 Type, but the range instance of P16.1 and P125.1 must be identical so the following additional FOL axiom would have to be added: P125(x,y,w) ⇔ (∃z) [E70(z) ∧ P16(x,z,w) ∧ P2(z,y)]" ________________________________ From: Crm-sig <crm-sig-boun...@ics.forth.gr> on behalf of Martin Doerr via Crm-sig <crm-sig@ics.forth.gr> Sent: 30 November 2022 14:35 To: crm-sig@ics.forth.gr Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] issue 534Shortcuts, .1-properties and the long paths Dear Christian-Emil, I agree with your precise analysis, except for: A) I'd argue that P138.1 mode of representation is indeed identical to P62.1. Simply, similar examples have not been provided. I suggest a FOL for that. "P138.1 mode of representation seems to be unrelated to P62.1 mode of depiction. Conclusion Neither of the .1-properties in the long path are semantically related to the .1-property of the shortcut property. Since P62 is declared as a shortcut of the long path, it cannot have the .1-property." I agree that P67.1 is unrelated. The kind of reference of a P138 instance would be "represents". This is implicit I think in the explanation of .1 properties of "has type"-type in the introduction. Could be a new issue. B) "The implication from the long path to the shortcut is ok since the shortcut has no .1-property. The implication from the shortcut to the long path is problematic since there is a .1-property in the long path. It is possible to imagine that the shortcut could have a P125.1 mode of use:E55 Type, but the range instance of P16.1 and P125 must be identical so the following additional FOL axiom would have to be added: P125(x,y,w) ⇔ (∃z) [E70(z) ∧ P16(x,z,w) ∧ P2(z,y)]" I have not understood why "the range instance of P16.1 and P125 must be identical ". E.g., used "passiflora racemosa flower", mode of use "as model", (Martin Johnson Heade, "Hummingbirds and Passionflowers", ca 1870-1883, Museum of Fine Arts Boston, https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/hummingbird-and-passionflowers/LAEr7eIcfErZwg?hl=en-GB&ms=%7B%22x%22%3A0.5%2C%22y%22%3A0.5%2C%22z%22%3A8.643661874326806%2C%22size%22%3A%7B%22width%22%3A3.2807205935359844%2C%22height%22%3A1.2375%7D%7D) a typical case for the ten thousands of botanical images from European botanical researchers in the previous centuries. Funny example is John James Audubon: He reportedly shot a bird in 1812 in Pennsylvania, named it "Regulus cuvieri", painted it probably with an error in "Birds of America", so that this species was never seen again. Best, Martin On 11/30/2022 1:35 PM, Christian-Emil Smith Ore via Crm-sig wrote: Dear all, My HW can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kd-zCO8e00WoKWb-9VAm96ECDEA2O_1iFI6kpgcuCnE Best, Christian-Emil _______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ Crm-sig mailing list Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
