I am agree with approach of moving English terms from class and property identifiers to rdf:label. Why user's instance identifiers are different? What identifier are you are proposing for 'Pablo Picasso'? Best regards Vadim
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Maximilian Schich Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 6:05 AM To: [email protected] Cc: 'crm-sig' Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] RDFS class identifiers "I want the version that has the class (E) or property (P) number plus the text in the label and just the class (E) or property (P) number in the ID." me too! This clarifies that the node with the ID 'E21' indeed represents a CIDOC-CRM concept like 'E21_Person' and not the word 'Person'. However we should clarifiy to the users, that they should not use a similar strategy in their rdf instances: The person 'Pablo Picasso' should not have an ID like '1495r3' and a label/appelation like '1495r3_Pablo_Picasso'. This seems logical from our point of view, but users may be tempted to do so. Can't we leave out * and #...? Kind regards, max. Dr. des. Maximilian Schich M.A. adr.: Westendstrasse 80 | D-80339 München | Germany tel.: +49-179-6678041 | skype: maximilian.schich mail: [email protected] | home: www.schich.info CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message including attachments, if any, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. On 13.12.2008 8:32 Uhr, Stephen Stead wrote: I want the version that has the class (E) or property (P) number plus the text in the label and just the class (E) or property (P) number in the ID. Rgds SdS Stephen Stead Tel +44 20 8668 3075 Mob +44 7802 755 013 E-mail [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Vladimir Ivanov Sent: 13 December 2008 07:15 To: martin Cc: crm-sig Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] RDFS class identifiers Dear all, I agree with Nick. This approach realises the statement that CRM is not about (Entity and Proprty) names but about (common, language independent) concepts. It also helps to manage multilingual version of the CRM when we have EXX in scope notes and can extend it with "full name" in a certain language. Example: <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="E21_"> <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Person</rdfs:label> <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">[Engish text]... E21_ [Engish text].......</rdfs:comment>. ... <rdfs:label xml:lang="ru">????????</rdfs:label> <rdfs:comment xml:lang="ru">[Russian text]... E21_ [Russian text]...</rdfs:comment>. ---------------- But natural language descriptions with codes and names are simplier than descriptions with codes only! Dear Martin, I'am afraid that "stars" (or any other symbol) in xml atributes may lead to some problems: 1. <rdfs:label xml:lang="*en*"> Some systems do not recognize *en* as English (en). 2. <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="*#E21*" /> and <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="*E21*"> refer to different entities . Maybe, we should write <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#*E21*" /> ? Best regards, Vladimir 2008/12/12 martin <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>: Dear Nick, I support this proposal as issue. I'd prefer however this form: <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="*E21*"> * * <rdfs:label xml:lang="*en*">*E21 Person*</rdfs:label> * * <rdfs:label xml:lang="*fr*">*E21 Personne*</rdfs:label> * * <rdfs:label xml:lang="*gr*">*E21 ???s?p?*</rdfs:label> * * <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="*#E20*" /> * * <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="*#E39*" /> </rdfs:Class> Opinions? Best, Martin Nicholas Crofts wrote: Dear all, I've been doing some work recently using the CRM rdfs. http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/rdfs/cidoc_v4.2.rdfs The naming convention adopted for the class and property identifiers strikes me as inconvenient in some respects. Currently, the names used for the class and property identifiers contain both the CRM code and the English label. 1. If the labels get changed at any time in the future, the identifiers are broken 2. Non English speakers are put at a disadvantage 3. The rdf syntax is more verbose than necessary ... this may sound trivial but that overhead can be huge when migrating large datasets. 4. The names have been mangled with underscores to make them respect xml/rdf syntax. I would suggest using just the codes (i.e. E1, P2, etc.) as class identifiers and including the names (in various languages) as rdf:labels. The result would like something like this: <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="*E21*"> * * <rdfs:label xml:lang="*en*">*Person*</rdfs:label> * * <rdfs:label xml:lang="*fr*">*Personne*</rdfs:label> * * <rdfs:label xml:lang="*gr*">*???s?p?*</rdfs:label> * * <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="*#E20*" /> * * <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="*#E39*" /> </rdfs:Class> Rather than this: <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="*E21.Person*"> * * <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="*#E20.Biological_Object*" /> * * <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="*#E39.Actor*" /> </rdfs:Class> (NB I've removed the rdfs:comments for clarity) It would be nice, of course, to be able to have both forms and define equivalence relationships between them. This could perhaps be done with the rdfs:isDefinedBy property? but I'm not sure that it's meant for this. Best wishes Nick Crofts ------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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
