Re: [Crm-sig] Modelling an Event's General Outcome Ideas? Properties?
Hi Thanasi, Yes that's true. Good reminder. That might be a solution but then we would need the particular property for expressing that two events are causally connected. I avoided to put it in the last email so as not to stir up to many semantic teapots. But obviously to have the general property we should have the particular property. So we have for example we have the particular properties: https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P20-had-specific-purpose/version-7.1.1 and https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P21-had-general-purpose/version-7.1.1 so the analogy to this in my situation is probably O13 triggers (is triggered by) https://cidoc-crm.org/crmsci/sites/default/files/CRMsci%20v.1.4.pdf and we need the analogy of p21 to make the model complete On another note out of curiosity, in the extension where every property has a 'type of' property what happens with the extant 'type of' properties? I assume there isn't any has general purpose of type property... or is there? Cheers G On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 9:20 PM Athanasios Velios via Crm-sig < crm-sig@ics.forth.gr> wrote: > Hi George, all, > > As part of Linked Conservation Data (and with the help of Carlo, Martin > and Steve) we proposed the idea of Typed Properties which derive from > current CRM properties and always have E55 Type as range. > > E.g. "bears feature" → "bears feature of type" so that one can describe > the type of something without specifying the individual. It is very > economical in conservation where we want to avoid describing hundreds of > individuals of similar types. > > We are still baking the exact impact of such a reduction from > individuals to Types. One issue in RDFS is the multitude of new > properties. There seems to be a simple implementation in OWL with > property paths. Not an immediate solution but a flag for more to come. > > All the best, > > Thanasis > > On 14/12/2021 15:49, George Bruseker via Crm-sig wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I have situations in which I have events where the data curators > > describe events for which they have generic knowledge of the outcome: > > sold, completed, incomplete, this sort of thing. So there is knowledge > > but it is not knowledge of the particular next event but of a general > > kind of outcome. > > > > We have properties like: P21 had general purpose (was purpose of) which > > is very useful for when the data curator only has generic knowledge > > knowledge and not particular knowledge regarding purpose. This seems a > > parallel to this case. > > > > Anybody else have this case and have an interest in a property like 'had > > general outcome' or 'had outcome of type' that goes from Event to a > > Type? Or, better yet if possible, a solution that doesn't involve a new > > property but that does meet this semantic need without too many > contortions? > > > > Best, > > > > George > > > > ___ > > 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
Re: [Crm-sig] Modelling an Event's General Outcome Ideas? Properties?
Hi George, all, As part of Linked Conservation Data (and with the help of Carlo, Martin and Steve) we proposed the idea of Typed Properties which derive from current CRM properties and always have E55 Type as range. E.g. "bears feature" → "bears feature of type" so that one can describe the type of something without specifying the individual. It is very economical in conservation where we want to avoid describing hundreds of individuals of similar types. We are still baking the exact impact of such a reduction from individuals to Types. One issue in RDFS is the multitude of new properties. There seems to be a simple implementation in OWL with property paths. Not an immediate solution but a flag for more to come. All the best, Thanasis On 14/12/2021 15:49, George Bruseker via Crm-sig wrote: Hi all, I have situations in which I have events where the data curators describe events for which they have generic knowledge of the outcome: sold, completed, incomplete, this sort of thing. So there is knowledge but it is not knowledge of the particular next event but of a general kind of outcome. We have properties like: P21 had general purpose (was purpose of) which is very useful for when the data curator only has generic knowledge knowledge and not particular knowledge regarding purpose. This seems a parallel to this case. Anybody else have this case and have an interest in a property like 'had general outcome' or 'had outcome of type' that goes from Event to a Type? Or, better yet if possible, a solution that doesn't involve a new property but that does meet this semantic need without too many contortions? Best, George ___ 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] About ... entity of Type?
better phrasing, 'about a particular thing that is known categorically' Eg Sales Record about 'Sale Event' On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 6:53 PM George Bruseker wrote: > Dear all, > > Recently work is on-going on a new property 'represents thing of type' > which is distinct from 'represents' (again that particular vs categorical > distinction). > > https://cidoc-crm.org/Issue/ID-476-pxx-represents-entity-of-type > > I am confronted with cases of an information object being about not a > particular thing but a category of thing... in my case event types but I > guess it could be object types. Of course the existing 'about' property is > sufficient but it doesn't allow to differentiate that it is not just a type > but about an as yet unknown X which was of type Y... It seems to me similar > to the other new property we are working on already. > > Does anybody else have cases like this? Any interest in a new parallel > property like that OR a solution that requires no new properties but also > doesn't require semantic back flips to understand? > > Best, > > George > ___ Crm-sig mailing list Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
[Crm-sig] About ... entity of Type?
Dear all, Recently work is on-going on a new property 'represents thing of type' which is distinct from 'represents' (again that particular vs categorical distinction). https://cidoc-crm.org/Issue/ID-476-pxx-represents-entity-of-type I am confronted with cases of an information object being about not a particular thing but a category of thing... in my case event types but I guess it could be object types. Of course the existing 'about' property is sufficient but it doesn't allow to differentiate that it is not just a type but about an as yet unknown X which was of type Y... It seems to me similar to the other new property we are working on already. Does anybody else have cases like this? Any interest in a new parallel property like that OR a solution that requires no new properties but also doesn't require semantic back flips to understand? Best, George ___ Crm-sig mailing list Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
[Crm-sig] Modelling an Event's General Outcome Ideas? Properties?
Hi all, I have situations in which I have events where the data curators describe events for which they have generic knowledge of the outcome: sold, completed, incomplete, this sort of thing. So there is knowledge but it is not knowledge of the particular next event but of a general kind of outcome. We have properties like: P21 had general purpose (was purpose of) which is very useful for when the data curator only has generic knowledge knowledge and not particular knowledge regarding purpose. This seems a parallel to this case. Anybody else have this case and have an interest in a property like 'had general outcome' or 'had outcome of type' that goes from Event to a Type? Or, better yet if possible, a solution that doesn't involve a new property but that does meet this semantic need without too many contortions? Best, George ___ Crm-sig mailing list Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
