I think the version issue is a general problem with CRM documentation,
which is related to the other thread about being able to resolve URIs
consistently. If you go to http://www.cidoc-crm.org/ and click "Current
Version", it's 6.2.3, so I wasn't aware there were any newer ones. Now that
I've found
I agree with Detlev's proposal. Also, I believe that versions should not
be included in the class URIs. These are not normally used to retrieve
reasoning rules but only to identify classes, right? Resolving the class
URI should return all versions of the class.
All the best,
Thanasis
On 16/0
Hi Rob,
I'm not sure that works since we've decided that a monogram is an E37_Mark
("This class comprises symbols, signs, signatures or short texts applied to
instances of E24 Physical Man-Made Thing by arbitrary techniques in order
to indicate the creator, owner, dedications, purpose, etc.").
I
> Martin Doerr hat am 16. Januar 2020 um 13:27
> geschrieben:
>
> (...)
> At FORTH we will implement anything that is regarded good practice, and
> does not create a manual overhead we cannot manage.
For formal specifications such as ontologies, there is a widely adopted pattern
for change m
Ethan,
Could you do :
?monogram a E33_Linguistic_Object ; crm:P106_is_composed_of ?character .
?character a E33_Linguistic_Object ; crm:P190_has_symbolic_content “☧” .
?
That would avoid the punning that the chi-rho is both an E33 and a literal at
the same time.
Rob
From: Crm-sig on behalf
On 16/01/2020 12:09, George Bruseker wrote:
Dear all,
I agree that this is an ongoing issue that creates barriers to uptake because
of confusion. It is an oft repeated question and deserves a clear answer. We
need a solution based on community wide best practice. Suggestions?
George,
It sounds
Dear all,
I have a python script that already does this for CRM and the Linked Art
extension.
The results of that script for Linked Art can be seen here:
https://linked.art/ns/terms/ -- the entire ontology is returned when
dereferencing the namespace
https://linked.art/ns/terms/paid_amount.
I have a followup question to the use of crm:P165i_is_incorporated_in. We
have implemented this property to link a Monogram to a representative,
idealized SVG URI. In a very narrow subset of cases (maybe only one that I
know of so far), a monogram is notable enough to have warranted entry into
Unic
On 1/16/2020 3:10 PM, Bekiari Xrysoula wrote:
Dear Martin
We would like to remind you the HW on issue 431. You may find the
details in http://www.cidoc-crm.org/Issue/ID-431-make-methodology-clear
all the best
Chryssoula - Eleni
Dear All,
Here my proposal, in italics the additions, at thre
Dear Francesco,
At FORTH we will implement anything that is regarded good practice, and
does not create a manual overhead we cannot manage. Volunteers to design
whatever is needed?
Best,
Martin
On 1/16/2020 12:45 PM, Francesco Beretta wrote:
Dear all,
I have a question about CIDOC CRM URI
Dear all,
I agree that this is an ongoing issue that creates barriers to uptake
because of confusion. It is an oft repeated question and deserves a clear
answer. We need a solution based on community wide best practice.
Suggestions?
Best,
George
On Thu., Jan. 16, 2020, 12:51 p.m. Francesco Bere
Dear all,
I have a question about CIDOC CRM URI management.
The last published version of CRMbase is 6.2.1. If I take the RDF
serialization, I find this base URI:
http://www.cidoc-crm.org/cidoc-crm/
If I sent this URI in the web:
http://www.cidoc-crm.org/cidoc-crm/E92_Spacetime_Volume
I
12 matches
Mail list logo
