Re: [Crm-sig] Meeting Minutes of Last SIG, Preparation for upcoming SIG (Paris, 11-14 June, 2019)

[Robert Sanderson]

Dear all,

For the upcoming Paris SIG, could we know the location please? The BNF has 
several venues around the city ☺
Or, even better, a hotel recommendation?

Many thanks,

Rob


From: Crm-sig  on behalf of George Bruseker 

Date: Friday, May 3, 2019 at 6:12 AM
To: "crm-sig@ics.forth.gr" 
Subject: [Crm-sig] Meeting Minutes of Last SIG, Preparation for upcoming SIG 
(Paris, 11-14 June, 2019)

Dear all,

The meeting minutes of the 43rd SIG held in Heraklion, Crete from 26-29 March, 
2019 are now available at the link below thanks to Eleni and Chryssoula.

http://www.cidoc-crm.org/arg_news/6114

For those planning to attend the upcoming SIG in Paris 11-14 June, 2019, we 
hope having the minutes in advance will give plenty of time to review the 
outcomes of the latest meeting.

It would be greatly appreciated if those who are planning to attend would be in 
touch with myself and Chryssoula to indicate the issues that are of greatest 
importance to cover and, of course, to provide your proposed solutions to these 
issues. This will help us organize the agenda to make most efficient use of our 
time together.

Looking forward to seeing many of you in lovely Paris!

Sincerely,

George

Re: [Crm-sig] begin_of_the_begin /end_of_the_end is excluded from time range?

[Robert Sanderson]

Thanks Florian, Nicola!

Should the example be updated (and thus we must all update our implementations) 
or the specification to match the example which everyone seems to do in 
practice?
My proposal would be to do the latter, in the face of the current ambiguity.

What has everyone else done in this situation? 3 data points is interesting, 
but still anecdotal.

(And I’m not going to mention leap seconds that would make the end of some 
years 23:59:60 instead of 23:59:59, which would be solved by an exclusive end 
date)

Rob

From: Nicola Carboni 
Date: Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 10:27 AM
To: Florian Kräutli 
Cc: Robert Sanderson , crm-sig , 
Adam Brin , Greg Williams 
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] begin_of_the_begin /end_of_the_end is excluded from time 
range?

Dear all,

I also follow the range as appear in the data linked by Florian, so:

crm:P82a_begin_of_the_begin “1586-01-01T00:00:00”^^xsd:date ;
crm:P82b_end_of_the_end  “1586-12-31T23:59:59”^^xsd:date ;
I agree that the example should be harmonised with the text ( which I assume is 
more authoritative). Thank you for pointing out about the problem


Best,


Nicola

Sent from my iPad

On 9 May 2019, at 10:04, Florian Kräutli 
mailto:fkraeu...@mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de>> wrote:
Dear Rob,

Not having read the guidelines as attentively as you I usually implement P82a/b 
suggesting that the begin and end date are both included in the range.

For example, here's the date related to a book published in 1586:

http://sphaera.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/id/item/7e241bb5-41e3-4e08-9ab1-547a93fe6b3d/publication/date

I think this is readable as a confidence interval of the book having been 
published somewhen in 1586, lacking better ways to express the level of 
accuracy in date datatypes.

Best,

Florian



On 8. May 2019, at 19:50, Robert Sanderson 
mailto:rsander...@getty.edu>> wrote:


Dear all,

I admit I made the rookie mistake of assuming that the P81a/b and P82a/b 
properties followed the typical temporal pattern of an inclusive beginning and 
an exclusive end.
Or using interval notation: [begin_of_the_begin, end_of_the_end)

Thus if you know that an event happened sometime in 1586, the begin of the 
begin would be 1586-01-01T00:00:00 and the end of the end would be 
1587-01-01:00:00:00.

However, http://www.cidoc-crm.org/guidelines-for-using-p82a-p82b-p81a-p81b 
seems to clarify that both are exclusive.

> "P82a_begin_of_the_begin" should be instantiated as the latest point in time 
> the user is sure that the respective temporal phenomenon is indeed *not yet* 
> happening.
> "P82b_end_of_the_end" should be instantiated as the earliest point in time 
> the user is sure that the respective temporal phenomenon is indeed *no 
> longer* ongoing.

And thus (begin_of_the_begin, end_of_the_end)

Meaning that the begin of the begin would need to be 1585-12-31T23:59:59 such 
that midnight on January first is included in the range, and the end of the end 
would be midnight of January first, 1587.

However, in the following paragraph it says:

>  … e.g. 1971 = Jan 1 1971 0:00:00. Respectively, for “P82b_end_of_the_end” 
> the implementation should “round it up”, e.g. 1971 = Dec 31 1971 23:59:59.

Which would mean that both ends were *included* in the range.
And thus [begin_of_the_begin, end_of_the_end]

So …

Enquiring minds that need to implement this consistently would like to know 
which is correct ☺


Many thanks!

Rob




___
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

Re: [Crm-sig] begin_of_the_begin /end_of_the_end is excluded from time range?

[Florian Kräutli]

Dear Rob,

Not having read the guidelines as attentively as you I usually implement P82a/b 
suggesting that the begin and end date are both included in the range.

For example, here's the date related to a book published in 1586:

http://sphaera.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/id/item/7e241bb5-41e3-4e08-9ab1-547a93fe6b3d/publication/date
 


I think this is readable as a confidence interval of the book having been 
published somewhen in 1586, lacking better ways to express the level of 
accuracy in date datatypes.

Best,

Florian


> On 8. May 2019, at 19:50, Robert Sanderson  wrote:
> 
>  
> Dear all,
>  
> I admit I made the rookie mistake of assuming that the P81a/b and P82a/b 
> properties followed the typical temporal pattern of an inclusive beginning 
> and an exclusive end.
> Or using interval notation: [begin_of_the_begin, end_of_the_end)
>  
> Thus if you know that an event happened sometime in 1586, the begin of the 
> begin would be 1586-01-01T00:00:00 and the end of the end would be 
> 1587-01-01:00:00:00.
>  
> However, http://www.cidoc-crm.org/guidelines-for-using-p82a-p82b-p81a-p81b 
>  seems to 
> clarify that both are exclusive.
>  
> > "P82a_begin_of_the_begin" should be instantiated as the latest point in 
> > time the user is sure that the respective temporal phenomenon is indeed 
> > *not yet* happening.
> > "P82b_end_of_the_end" should be instantiated as the earliest point in time 
> > the user is sure that the respective temporal phenomenon is indeed *no 
> > longer* ongoing.
>  
> And thus (begin_of_the_begin, end_of_the_end)
>  
> Meaning that the begin of the begin would need to be 1585-12-31T23:59:59 such 
> that midnight on January first is included in the range, and the end of the 
> end would be midnight of January first, 1587.
>  
> However, in the following paragraph it says:
>  
> >  … e.g. 1971 = Jan 1 1971 0:00:00. Respectively, for “P82b_end_of_the_end” 
> > the implementation should “round it up”, e.g. 1971 = Dec 31 1971 23:59:59.
>  
> Which would mean that both ends were *included* in the range.
> And thus [begin_of_the_begin, end_of_the_end]
>  
> So …
>  
> Enquiring minds that need to implement this consistently would like to know 
> which is correct ☺
>  
>  
> Many thanks!
>  
> Rob
>  
>  
>  
>  
> ___
> Crm-sig mailing list
> Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr 
> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig 
>