Hi Dan! Interesting question. > Documents with applied seals... Beside the material of the seal, I want to > specify its colour,
To my mind things like Seals and Ink Stamps are E25 Man-Made Features. Since Man-Made Feature is a subclass of Man-Made Thing, you can still attach Material. But there's a strong correlation between type and material: you can't make a relief seal from ink So I think it's better to incorporate type and material into an enumeration, using a thesauris like: <thesaurus/marks/wax_seal> <thesaurus/marks/golden_seal> <thesaurus/marks/leaden_seal> <thesaurus/marks/leaden_seal_with_machined_stamp> <thesaurus/marks/ink_stamp> <thesaurus/marks/customs_banderol_sticker> <thesaurus/marks/brand_burned_on_cow> (I'm sure there's a proper term for that). NOTE: E37 Mark is an information object so I should have used something like "seal" in the URLs above, but I'm too lazy to change that now.. In fact AAT defines some such hierarchy: http://www.getty.edu/vow/AATHierarchy?find=&logic=AND¬e=&subjectid=300200896 And here is the sub-hierarchy of seals: http://www.getty.edu/vow/AATHierarchy?find=&logic=AND¬e=&subjectid=300028877 > <mySeal [E84]> <P56_bears_feature> <myColour [E26_Physical_Feature]> I don't think a Feature is something that covers the entirety of a Physical thing. But I consulted the scope note of Feature. Relevant excerpts: - "*may* have a one-, two- or three-dimensional geometric *extent*", i.e. not the whole thing. But not necessarily - "*portions* of particular objects with partially imaginary borders" - "can be .. scratches, holes, *reliefs*: so Seals are properly modeled as features, even if they have relief. - "*surface colours*, reflection zones in an opal crystal": so colors *are* included. But I think "colored spots/zones" is meant here > What's the right predicate (domain E26, range E55) to use, in order to say > "myColour IS blood red" ? I think an extension prop: P2X_has_color, subprop of P2_has_type > using a suitable concept from the AAT Colour facet > NB. I'm converting AAT too. Well don't. Use http://vocab.getty.edu/. E.g. the above is http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300310722 - The old doc is here: http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabularies/lod/aat_semantic_representation.pdf - the new doc (coming in a week) is here: http://vladimiralexiev.github.io/aat/index.htm - also coming in a week is TGN -- In summary, I would model it like this <document> P56_bears_feature <document/seal>. <document/seal> a E25_Man-Made_Feature; P2_has_type <thesaurus/marks/wax_seal>; P2X_has_color aat:300310722. # blood red Or if you already have a Materials thesaurus, split it like this: <document> P56_bears_feature <document/seal>. <document/seal> a E25_Man-Made_Feature; P2_has_type <thesaurus/marks/seal>; P45_consists_of <thesaurus/materials/wax>; P2X_has_color aat:300310722. # blood red
