P137 was introduced to deal with type specimens in natural history. Such a specimen is selected for exampel among one of 10 flies used to describe a species. A species can be considered to be a hypothetical set comprising all specimens of the species. A more simplistic and old fashioned view is to see the type-specimen as a prototype like the meter stick in Paris. In both cases the species is a set and can be expressed by a logical proposition. A type in the CRM may well be considered to be a set although it also could be a set theoretical class. This discussion is however outside the cultural heritage scope of CRM, but is of cause interesting.
Chr-Emil > Dear Vladimir, > > Thank you very much for your comment. > > Actually the domain - range restriction of R10 to F3, F5 is the kind of > intension change > that justifies the subproperty. If you may interpret the label "has type" > and > "example" as synonymous, has no relevance. Labels are only mnemonics. > Note, that > the CRM is not a dictionary that would explain the meaning of English > words or expressions. > > Domain and Range of properties are part of their intension. Beyond that, > only the > scope note matters. > > Actually the link P137 should be declared as subproperty of P2. This needs > inverting P137. This is an issue for the next meeting. > > The notion of "exemplifying" in P137 is that of selecting ONE instance to > be > a particularly good representative. This is not the sense of R10, but > similar > to the "representative assignment" in FRBRoo, which we put now in an Annex > of the document. > > Best, > > Martin > > > Vladimir Ivanov wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> In fact, each property (R10, P137, etc.) >> could be treated as a couple : R10F(orward) and R10B(ackward) or P137F >> and P137B. >> >> Maybe, the issue is in the order of property names. >> >> "is example of #R10F# (has example) #R10B#" and >> "is exemplified by #P137F# (exemplifies) #P137B#" . >> >> and property hierarchy: >> >> R10F Subproperty of P137B >> R10B Subproperty of P137F >> >> looks normal. >> ----- >> >> Or, we could imagine inverse order: >> >> "is example of #R10F# (has example) #R10B#" and >> "is exemplified by #P137B# (exemplifies) #P137F#" . >> >> and correspond property hierarchy. >> >> >> As for the first part of the letter, >> >> We could apply a simple test: >> >> To be _an example of_ someting is to _have type_ of something >> isn't it? >> >> >> Best, >> Vladimir. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: "JoÖo Oliveira" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 21:43:07 -0200 >> Subject: [Crm-sig] FRBRoo R10's superproperty >> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> The R10 property has the following definition: >>> >>> R10 is example of (has example) >>> Domain: F5 Item >>> Range: F3 Manifestation Product Type >>> Subproperty of: P2 has type >>> >>> According CIDOC CRM document, "the intension of >>> the subproperty extends the intension of the superproperty, >>> i.e. its traits are more restrictive than that of its superproperty" >>> >>> To be a "example" is not a "more restrictive" case of to be a >>> "type". >>> I think the most appropriate CIDOC CRM superproperty for R10 >>> should be: >>> >>> P137: is exemplified by (exemplifies) >>> Domain: E55 Type >>> Image: E1 CRM Entity. >>> >>> So, to align the subproperty intension with the superproperty >>> intension, >>> I think it's necessary to redefine (invert Range/Domain) R10: >>> >>> R10 has example (is example of) >>> Domain: F3 Manifestation Product Type >>> Range: F5 Item >>> Subproperty of: P137 is exemplified by (exemplifies) >>> >>> Now, >>> F3 Manifestation Product Type <has example> F5 Item >>> is a specific case of >>> E55 Type <is exemplied by> E1 CRM Entity. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Joao Lima >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Crm-sig mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Crm-sig mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >> >> > > > -- > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Dr. Martin Doerr | Vox:+30(2810)391625 | > Principle Researcher | Fax:+30(2810)391638 | > | Email: [email protected] | > | > Center for Cultural Informatics | > Information Systems Laboratory | > Institute of Computer Science | > Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH) | > | > Vassilika Vouton,P.O.Box1385,GR71110 Heraklion,Crete,Greece | > | > Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl | > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >
