Dear All,
Single quotes are consistently used throughout the text to denote
strings, and not informal naming of things. E90 is a subclass of E28,
and E41 subclass of E90, and therefore both strings are examples of E28,
by virtue of being E90.
Obviously, the clarifying subclass is missing. I propose the examples to be:
§Beethoven’s “Ode an die Freude” (Ode to Joy) (E73)
§the definition of “ontology” in the Oxford English Dictionary (E73)
§the knowledge about the victory at Marathon carried by the famous
runner (E89)
§‘Maxwell equations’[preferred subject access point from LCSH, (E41)
http://lccn.loc.gov/sh85082387, as of 19 November 2012]
§‘Equations, Maxwell’[variant subject access point, from the same
source] (E41)
§ Maxwell's equations (E89)
§ The encoding of Maxwells equations as in
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c4/Maxwell'sEquations.svg/500px-Maxwell'sEquations.svg.png
(E73)
The point with the Maxwell Equations is that they have an exact logical
identity regardless the notation. It was the names we are interested in.
The example "Maxwell's equations" is already under E89. What we have
missed is an example of the dozens of the equation notations, such as :
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c4/Maxwell'sEquations.svg/500px-Maxwell'sEquations.svg.png,
which is an E73 (encoded meaning), in order to make the thing complete.
Best,
martin
On 9/6/2017 10:19 AM, Stephen Stead wrote:
Robert
I believe you are correct. They are different appellations of the same
conceptual object. I think that the idea was to show that it was the E28 not
the name that we were interested in. It obviously fails the usability test!
Perhaps we could run the two examples together and say:-
‘Maxwell equations’ [preferred subject access point from LCSH,
http://lccn.loc.gov/sh85082387, as of 19 November 2012] also known as
‘Equations, Maxwell’ [variant subject access point, from the same source]
Rgds
SdS
Stephen Stead
Tel +44 20 8668 3075
Mob +44 7802 755 013
E-mail [email protected]
LinkedIn Profile https://www.linkedin.com/in/steads/
-----Original Message-----
From: Crm-sig [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert
Sanderson
Sent: 05 September 2017 22:39
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Crm-sig] E28 Examples
Dear all,
The final two examples of E28 Conceptual Object are:
* ‘Maxwell equations’ [preferred subject access point from LCSH,
http://lccn.loc.gov/sh85082387, as of 19 November 2012]
* ‘Equations, Maxwell’ [variant subject access point, from the same source]
Is this meant to imply that these are /different/ E28s? The example was clearly
explicitly chosen, so I wonder what it was meant to demonstrate, as I would
have expected these to be two different Appellations for the same Conceptual
Object.
Thanks for any clarifications,
Rob
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
_______________________________________________
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 |
--------------------------------------------------------------
