Dear Franco,
I'd like to clarify: The CRM does not intend to constitute a dictionary
of what terms mean in an absolute way. Of course the content of the
Digital Library at any point in time is immaterial. No objections to
your comments. But it is equally obvious, that any accessible form of it
must be a physical feature.
The question we are discussing, is rather which of the involved things
is the one that provide an identity condition that corresponds to the
notion of "holding" and "my copy". If I am not mistaken, copyright
enforcement may require someone to "delete" a digital file from his system.
If this is true, then, clearly, there exists a sense which is socially
and legally functional, of a "digital file" as a physical feature.
The next question is, if the concept of "holding" a digital library,
pertains to the physical or the immaterial nature. If a library has a book,
we always mean a physical copy, even though the content of the book is
not theirs. In that sense, the digital and the traditional information form
makes no difference.
Classes in the CRM are exclusively defined in a way which represents the
phenomena of reality in a way so that the relations between them are
well defined, or better "confined" to the domain and range.
The relationship of "holding" is one of these relations. Hence the
question is, what of the involved phenomena is the relevant one for
"holding", the material, or the immaterial, or another one, and not, if
"digital" means physical or immaterial out of context.
It appears to me, that the important new quality of "digital" is NOT at
all that it is a new information form or that it is "virtual". At the
first glance, it is just another materialization of information. What
makes the difference, is the ease and speed by which we can move it from
one carrier to another. This changes practices of holding. Whereas a
library would not produce books, it may quite well now "reproduce"
(fotocopy etc) books from their holdings. They may not be allowed to
reproduce from other's holdings. Digital libraries will send copies over
electronic communication. The Munich Digital Library explicity refers
to analog holdings they have digitized.
Now, for the digital library as a whole, undergoing intended changes,
what is the relevant identity condition, and how to model that in an
easy way? I tried to point out, that both, a concept of a "volatile
information object" and describing the materialization has its pros and
cons.
Would that make sense?:-)
All the best,
Martin
On 1/11/2018 12:12 AM, Franco Niccolucci wrote:
Not really, Daria. It is not digital, it possibly represents/is the support of
a digital encoding, same as a selfie of me on my iphone is not my face.
Franco
Prof. Franco Niccolucci
Director, VAST-LAB
PIN - U. of Florence
Scientific Coordinator
ARIADNE - PARTHENOS
Piazza Ciardi 25
59100 Prato, Italy
Il giorno 10 gen 2018, alle ore 22:41, Дарья Юрьевна Гук <[email protected]>
ha scritto:
QR-code is very phisical (on surface) and absolutely digital, because presents 0
& 1.
With kind regards,
Daria Hookk
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
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 |
--------------------------------------------------------------
