On 20/11/2014 7:01 μμ, Christian-Emil Smith Ore wrote:
My view is that a coin is an information carrier and indeed is of the category
of objects found and stored in a library
C-E
Dear Christian-Emil,
of course we can argue that there is information on it, but we do not
acquire
coins to get access to the "Expression" on it. A coin would be
functional even without any
information on it. May be we overstrech the notion of "Expression" in
this case? Of course, the coin
by its shape represents a symbol, but this symbol classifies the coin.
If I have 10 copies of Shakespeare,
I would not argue to have acquired more Shakespeare, as I would with 10
Euro coins.
It appears to me, that there is not enough similarity to classify a coin
as a Manifestation Product Type.
Opinions?
Best,
Martin
-----Original Message-----
From: Crm-sig [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Maria
Theodoridou
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 4:34 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] Coins 2 CRM (again)
Dear Dan,
Indeed we have considered your thoughts and we have defined as
extensions for the coins and later for the CRM:
E12 Production. PC1 produced things of type: E55 Type
E22 Man-Made Object. PC2 is example of: E55 Type
Both PC1 and PC2 are subproperties of P2 has type
The above are depicted in slide 23 in my presentation where I describe how
we modeled the categorical production.
We believe that PC1 and PC2 are a generalization of R26 produced things of
type and R7 is example of of FRBR.
FRBR is not suitable for our coin modeling since it refers to bibliographic
information, as Christian-Emil pointed out.
It is open for discussion if there is a need for generalizing F32 Manifestation
Product Type
This is a topic for future discussion in CRM-SIG.
Best regards,
Maria
On 19/11/2014 3:02 μμ, Dan Matei wrote:
Dear Maria
Thanks you. I've read your (very useful) London presentation:
http://www.slideshare.net/MariaTheodoridou/london-meetup2014-
mappingchi2cidoccrm
<http://www.slideshare.net/MariaTheodoridou/london-meetup2014-
mappingchi2cidoccrm>
and I plan to take advantage of the mapping:
http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl/3M <http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl/3M>
But I'm tempted to treat the coins as exemplars of an "issue", i.e.
<F5_Item> <crm:R7_is_example_of>
<crm:F3_Manifestation_Product_Type>
IMHO, a thing like:
http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.1(2).cl.31
<http://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.1%282%29.cl.31>
is a F3, mutatis mutandis.
When you did your mapping did you considered something like this ?
And which were the arguments against ?
Best,
Dan
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maria Theodoridou
R & D Engineer
Information Systems Laboratory & Centre for Cultural Informatics Institute of
Computer Science Foundation of Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)
Science and Technology Park of Crete Vassilika Vouton, P.O.Box 1385, GR-711
10 Heraklion, Crete, Greece
Tel.: +30-2810-391731 Fax: +30-2810-391638 E-mail: [email protected]
URL: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr | Vox:+30(2810)391625 |
Research Director | 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) |
|
N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton, |
GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece |
|
Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl |
--------------------------------------------------------------
