Am 08.04.2013 um 11:03 schrieb Athina Kritsotaki <[email protected]>:
> New Issue: 223
> Title: Correcting issue 156
>
> Dear all,
>
> Regarding the decision made on Issue 156 (that changed the range of
> “P39 measured” to be E1 CRM Entity instead of E70 Thing)
> there seems to be an inconsistency in resolving that issue.
> Current proposal: As a consequence of moving the range from E70 to E1,
> should also be to move the domain of the property P43 has dimension (is
> dimension of): E54 Dimension from E70 to E1, in order to be consistent.
> By definition, the property P43 has dimension is a shortcut of the more
> fully developed path through P39 measured (was measured by) , E16
> Measurement P40 observed dimension (was observed in) to E54 Dimension.
> So, think about this and comment,
>
> Athina Kritsotaki
What exactly is the question? Is this more than a mere technicality after the
corresponding change to P39? Can one expect situations where this specific
shortcut describes the Real World differently than the fully developed path?
And sorry for some additional questions that have probably been asked and
answered before, but I don't fully understand Issue 156. Was the change
introduced in order to measure E2 Temporal Entities? Why can E77 Persistent
Item and its subclass E39 Actor now be measured when they couldn't be measured
before?
What can be measured in a "proper" E1? Does the argument regarding E18 Physical
Thing and its subclasses E19 Physical Object and E26 Physical Feature ("we
forbid in the CRM to declare complements") also apply to E1 and its subclasses
E2 and E77, and one would choose E1 if in doubt? Are the other subclasses (E52
Time-Span, E53 Place and E54 Dimension itself) also supposed to be measured
with P43 / P39?
(Issue 159 was closed in 2008, but the change to P39 is apparently not yet
included in the latest Cidoc version; why?)
And sorry again, but I don't understand the general relationship between
measurements and counting. In Issue 157 (but not in the 5.1 draft) there is an
example "Number of coins in a silver hoard" for E54 Dimension. So, is the
process of counting just a specific kind of measurement, even if there is no
measurement unit, i.e. an E54 with an E60 but no E58? Is counting included in
the description "can be measured by some calibrated means" in the Scope note of
E54? Why not use E60 directly without E54?
Is there, or should there be, a connection to P57 "has number of parts"? This
seems to imply a counting process. Is it a measurement, too? Should P57 be a
shortcut, too?
In the Scope note of E39: "Material and immaterial things and processes may be
measured, e.g. the number of words in a text". (When counting words in a text,
is there a measurement unit or not?) Why does P57 not apply here, apart from
its domain being E19 Physical Object? And "An instance of E54 Dimension
represents the true quantity": Is it even possible to assume a "true quantity"
with a wobbly and language-specific concept such as "word"?
Thanks,
Wolfgang
