Proposal: add subclass of Activity called Discovery (or Finding). Justification: for archaeological objects, quite often we don't have Production data, but we have data about the Discovery of the object (who, when, where).
Examples from the wild: 1. BM data has associations such as Excavated by, Found/Acquired by, Excavated/Findspot, etc. In ResearchSpace we map this to a subclass as described above: bmo:EX_Discovery rdfs:subClassOf crm:E7_Activity; rdfs:label "Discovery"; rdfs:comment "The activity of finding, excavating or collecting an object". See here: https://confluence.ontotext.com/display/ResearchSpace/BM+Association+Mapping+v2#BMAssociationMappingv2-FoundBy https://confluence.ontotext.com/display/ResearchSpace/BM+Association+Mapping+v2#BMAssociationMappingv2-Findspot 2. The Fundamental Relations TR (Doerr, Tzompanaki) www.cidoc-crm.org/docs/TechnicalReport429_April2012.pdf uses a made up (non-standardized) class C2.Finding (or C2.Finding_Event) for this purpose. The TR gives a similar justification: "Especially in the archaeological field of study, one is interested in Things found in a certain Place. This place could be a from (history) for this thing especially when the creation place is unknown." 3. CLAROS also singles out the Finding event, but instead of rdf:type (i.e. an RDF class) uses P2_has_type with a blank node: http://data.clarosnet.org/doc:jameel/object/EA1956.1145.ttl crm:P2_has_type _38:Event_FindObject; Here "_38:" indicates the blank node, and its use makes no sense (esp. because it's not present in the data) Best regards! Vladimir
