In which case, can I suggest the following change to the scope note:
Old scope note:
This property describes the active participation of an instance of E39
Actor in an instance of E7 Activity. It implies causal or legal
responsibility. The P14.1 in the role of property of the property
specifie
On 1/12/2022 10:45 PM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
Thanks Martin! :)
For the querying, I agree that if there's subProperty inferencing, and
you query for participated in, but the particular data uses carried
out by, that you'll still find it.
However without those inferences, or in our case, as a
Thanks Martin! :)
For the querying, I agree that if there's subProperty inferencing, and you
query for participated in, but the particular data uses carried out by,
that you'll still find it.
However without those inferences, or in our case, as a profile for as few
choices to make as possible in t
Dear Robert,
Yes, scope notes can always be improved!
The role of the child should definitely not be regarded as P14.
Necessary participation is definitey not meant by "causal" or "legal
responsibility" in this scope note. P14 is meant in an active sense. In
a sense, any participation may hav
Dear all,
A question came up in the Linked Art group today about the intent of
"causal" in the scope not for P14 carried out by.
The scope note reads, in its entirety:
This property describes the active participation of an instance of E39
Actor in an instance of E7 Activity. It implies causal or
