Dear all,
according to Martin's Email ("Of course, this is one possible "CRM
compatible form", (if you could in the end give us
something we agree on, the sooner the better, please change also the
Primitive Value implementation).") and some discussions Martin and I had
in Athens there are some issues for the scope notes to discuss/modify, like:
-According to Martin and his RDF Version (also mentioned in the compat.
document) all labels of properties should be extended by a F (PXXXF) and
the labels of the inverse properties by B (PXXXB). As proposed by Martin
by the compat. document this would change e.g. "P1 is identified by" and
"(identifies)" to "P1F.is_identified_by" and "P1B.identifies" as
proposed in the "reduced_crm.owl"-file Martin sent. Our implementation
in contrast simply names the properties "P1.is_identified_by" and
"P1I.identifies" (I for inverse). Mathematicians often name inverse
relations with an ^1.
This does not affect the semantics of the properties, so I think the SIG
could simply vote on this issue.
-For the entities E59 Primitive Value (and sub-entities) Martin proposed
that they should not be entities like E1 and others anymore.
-The sub-entities of E41 Appellation should they be all different or
could the same particular/instance of a E44 Place Appellation
additionally be an instance of an E82 Actor Appellation?These are the issues I remember, Martin could you please add others, if I forgot one? Best Bernhard -- ************************************************************* Bernhard Schiemann, Dipl. Ing. Artificial Intelligence Division Department of Computer Science University of Erlangen-Nuremberg Haberstr. 2, D-91058 Erlangen, Germany Tel.: +49-9131-85-28984 Fax : +49-9131-85-28986 Email: [email protected] http://www8.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/inf8/en/schiemann.html To verify my keys, please use gpg keyserver: pgp.mit.edu *************************************************************
<<attachment: schiemann.vcf>>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
