Dear Robert,
This is a basic question of modelling methodology, which must be clearly
understood by those using any current formal ontology. We are modelling
under the "Open World Assumption". This means that anything *not said
*may be true or false, but never false per rule. If something is an
instance of a class A, it does never imply that it cannot be an instance
of a class B *at the same time*, except if we declare these classes as
"disjoint".
Hence, Appellation being not a subclass of Linguistic Object, *does not
mean that it is not a Linguistic Object.* It means that an instance of
Appellation *may or may not be* a Linguistic Object, and many other
things not said. A Title on the other side is *defined to be *always a
Linguistic Object.
If an instance of Appellation, such as "information science" happens to
be a Linguistic Object, you declare it to be instance of both classes,
which is standard RDF/OWL. This is called "multiple instantiation"
Title in the CRM has a more specific sense than just being a Linguistic
Object and Appellation. We do not declare subclasses of combinations of
classes just for the sake of an accidental combination. It would fill
the CRM with some thousand classes without particular meaning. You can
do that for your own convenience in a local extension. If title were
indeed regarded only an accidental combination of Appellation and
Linguistic Object, it has to be deleted from the CRM.
So, there is neither an intellectual nor technical issue to it, as far
as I understand:-).
All the best,
Martin
On 9/12/2017 12:50 AM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
Dear all,
Is there a reason why only Titles are also Linguistic Objects?
The examples of Appellation:
"the Forth Bridge"
"the Merchant of Venice" (E35)
"Spigelia marilandica (L.) L." [not the species, just the name]
"information science" [not the science itself, but the name through which we
refer to it in an English-speaking context]
“安” [Chinese “an”, meaning “peace”]
All of these Appellations are in a language (English, Latin, and Chinese) but
only “The Merchant of Venice” can have its language explicitly declared, as
Titles are also Linguistic Objects.
If Appellation was a subclass of Linguistic Object (as a descendent of Symbolic
Object) then this issue would go away. And also make Title just a P2 of
Appellation, rather than a special case.
Alternatively, Title could be re-described to cover all Appellations with
language, whereas E41 would be for Appellations like identifiers that do not
have linguistic content.
Rob
_______________________________________________
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 |
--------------------------------------------------------------
