Lovely, everyone is in agreement ☺
Thanks all,
Rob
From: Crm-sig on behalf of Martin Doerr
Date: Monday, June 24, 2019 at 9:37 AM
To: "crm-sig@ics.forth.gr"
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] [Sci] Are O9 and P171 identical?
Dear All,
I think O9 subproperty of P177 makes sense. The o
Dear All,
I think O9 subproperty of P177 makes sense. The one is more general, and
is about the statement made, the other is that an actual observation
happened, so it is verified in a sense, and limited to observable
properties, whatever they are.
Best,
Martin
On 6/21/2019 8:52 PM,
the intensions are different.
Chr-Emil
From: Crm-sig on behalf of Athanasios
Velios
Sent: 21 June 2019 19:52
To: crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] [Sci] Are O9 and P171 identical?
I think "O9 observed property type" could be define
-sig] [Sci] Are O9 and P171 identical?
I think "O9 observed property type" could be defined as a sub-property
of "P177 assigned property type". I do not think it should be removed,
it may be useful for searching.
Also, I have noticed that in version 6.2.6, under "P2 has
I think "O9 observed property type" could be defined as a sub-property
of "P177 assigned property type". I do not think it should be removed,
it may be useful for searching.
Also, I have noticed that in version 6.2.6, under "P2 has type", the
"P177 assigned property type" is not listed as a
Apologies for the confusion!
I mean P177 assigned property type, not P171!
(I was working from memory, given that the numbers were reused … to cross the
threads)
Rob
From: Robert Sanderson
Date: Friday, June 21, 2019 at 8:53 AM
To: "crm-sig@ics.forth.gr"
Subject: [Sci] Are O9 and P171
Dear all,
In working on a model for our conservation science folks, I observe [intended]
that O9 and the new P171 both fill the same role – a subproperty of P2_has_type
that goes from the activity to a property type, such that the explicit
relationship between the observed entity and the
