I will try and answer you points 1 by 1 but there is a big proviso for all these hypothetical cases: Where in current museums documentation practice is this done? If it is not being done then it is out of scope for the CRM! Imagine this situation: "A cow and some chicken were sold for $5000". 1]- What if I don't know the complete set of objects that was sold? (I can identify the cow, but don't even know the number of chicken) [It is a multi-part object NOT a collection as it has no curation plan] 2]- What if I don't know the split of the price amongst the objects? [It is the price of the multi-part object] 3]- Do I need to make a collection of these objects, only so I can say the price? [It is NOT a collection see above] 4] Then why is "P24 transferred title of" multi-valued? [Because one Transfer may Transfer the title of many objects or even many multi-part objects] 5] What if you don't know the people's identities? [Then you create Actors to whom you attach no appellation though you may be able to derive this from another data source] 6] What if you don't even know the exact number? E.g. "approximately 5000 people were evacuated as a result of a dangerous goods incident" [Then they are a Group where you do not know the exact number of members] 7] There are projects that produce nothing (failed ones). [Then the cost is to produce an immaterial object] 8] And the correlation between the effort/cost spent on something and its "true cost" is not straightforward. [The CRM is not intended to make life easy just model our documentation of it!!] 9] That's the point of Earned Value Management: to be able to track planned [Estimated Cost of the immaterial or a different measurement of the cost of the Thing as needed] vs actual [Cost of the Thing] vs earned cost [Another type of cost of the thing] . 10] So a Risk would be maybe E90 Symbolic Object that, if materialized, begets a Risk that is E5 Event? [More likely a Propositional Object] 11] You have a point here... Though maybe CRM should also be able to model *hypothetical* events. [Out of Scope but one of many possible extensions that has been discussed in the SIG] 12] But still: upon materialization, the conceptual risk's Impact will become the risk event's Loss. How do you model this Loss without going into details on what exactly was lost (and I may not want to go to such details) [Not sure I understand what you mean here but I think this would be the Value of the Thing lost even if you do not detail what it comprises off ie it could be the loss of an immaterial thing like a poem (c.f. Sapho)] 13] You may be able to "individuate" some of these into Things, but in many cases you cannot. People want to talk about "approx number of injured/dead" even before they find all the bodies and write off the unfound as "Missing persons". [They are still things even if people don't want to talk about them! Missing dialogue does not change the semantic nature of something] 14] I think there are also a lot of examples from Physics and Chemistry that need to measure Events, not the (often unknown or uncountable) things the event operates on. E.g. intensity of chemical reaction, acceleration (rate of change of the speed of a movement), rate of Absorbed Dose of radiation, etc. [These are typically measuring the number of events in a period of time or the behaviour of something over a period of time ie the event lasts a second and the object does something in that event. They are not measurements of the event] 15] Look at http://qudt.org/ in section "The SI System". Search for "per second". I think these units measure Events, not Things. [See 14] 16] > In general temporal entities can only be measured in time and all the properties for locating and measuring them in time are already in the CRM. Do you mean only Duration and dates (inner and outer bounds)? [Plus relative time: The Allen operators] 17] How do you prove the statement "can only"? [We define them as such so I do not have to prove it: It is their ontological nature as derived from our analysis of our domain] 18] And finally, how do you explain this: "P39 measured" points to E1, "P43 has dimension" is a shortcut thereof, but P43 points lower than E1. (http://personal.sirma.bg/vladimir/crm-graphical/#measurement) [ P43 represents the common shortcut observed in existing documentation systems that measure particular Things] Hope this helps SdS
Stephen Stead Tel +44 20 8668 3075 Mob +44 7802 755 013 E-mail [email protected] LinkedIn Profile http://uk.linkedin.com/in/steads
