Hi friends,
Recall Fronco's:
(R) A class is declared if, and only if, either or both of the following
applies:
(R1) it is required as the domain or range of a property inappropriate to its
superclass, or
(R2) it is a key concept in the practical scope
1. I would regret the CRMExit of E82_Actor_Appellation !
Actually, in my application I have even a subtype: "Anthroponym". By virtue of
R2. Not to mention that its values are rdf:XMLLiterals.
E.g.
"Pieter Bruegel [Breughel, Brueghel] the Elder, called Peasant Bruegel, also
called Pieter the Droll"
Reason: I have to split it in segments, in order to be able to generate
(refined) index entries and to display some segments in bold and
some segments in italics.
True not only for anthroponyms. Also for other actor appellations. E.g.
"United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland"
2. For the same reason (R2), I use a kind of (not subclass of – with dilemmas)
E75_Conceptual_Object_Appellation: Term. E.g.
#woman[E55_Type]
P1_is_Identified_by
#woman@en[Term] rdfs:label<#singular> "woman"
#woman@en[Term] rdfs:label<#plural> "women"
Note: several types could share the same term (e.g. "mass").
Sometimes, I use also XMLLiterals as values i.e. instead rdfs:label, I use
has_Xml_Value. Why ? For cases like:
"la femme"/"les femmes", "effet Doppler-Fizeau".
Of course, I could use only E41_Appellation and differentiate them via .1
qualifiers. But... R2 !
Dan
