Dear All,
Firstly I agree with Thanasis. The text is obsolete, because the things
we first considered were museum objects.
Secondly, we do not require by "in particular it may" to have a product
at all". A technique may indeed only shape an activity, regardless if
leaves a persistent item behind or not.
Performances are explicitly described in FRBRoo, and should not be
regarded as "things produced". This would mess up the distinction
between doing and being, which is absolutely core.
I think "a performance as an entity that is created by the activity of
playing" is a recursion on the same thing: The performance IS the
activity of playing, and not a distinct thing created by playing,
according to all common sense. A performance is "on-going", and not
"present", at least in common language, and therefore a Temporal Entity.
Similarly :"... In particular it comprises plans for deliberate human
activities
that may result in new instances of *E71 Man-Made Thing or E7 Activity*..."
I think "or E7 Activity" must not be there: "... human activities
that may result in new instances ...of E7 Activity " appears odd to me.
What causality? We have discussed in length in the past that it is not
easy to draw border lines to which degree a plan constrains the
execution to a particular form or not.
I suggest : ""... In particular it comprises plans for deliberate human
activities
that may result in new instances of *E71 Man-Made Thing or for shaping
or guiding the execution of instance of E7 Activity*..."
Opinions?
Best,
Martin
On 8/9/2018 8:01 PM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
It seems to me that the Activity of performing the music described in
the notation is the activity that has the P33_used_specific_technique
relationship to the E29.
Thus:
_:performance a E7_Activity ;
p14_carried_out_by <san_francisco_symphony_orchestra> ;
p16_used_specific_object <sfs_copy_of_score> ;
p33_used_specific_technique [
a E29_Design_or_Procedure ;
rdfs:label “Ode to Joy” ;
p128i_is_carried_by <sfs_copy_of_score> ] .
If that activity creates something, then it must be at least a E71
Man-Made Thing as all activities are carried out by Men. I mean
humans. [I will leave the sexist language of the labels to a separate
issue] I agree that E29 could refer to E71 rather than E24 – a set of
design principles for reflecting upon the CRM ontology is a plan for
creating conceptual objects. As is a mathematics lesson plan or a
philosophy text book.
As to whether a performance is a physical or conceptual man-made thing …
To me, a performance as an entity that is created by the activity of
playing a musical instrument or singing is a very transitory physical
phenomenon, notably the modulation of air pressure into sound waves
that can be measured and captured by analog or digital devices. The
same way that we can photograph an object by recording its reflected
light, we can record a performance by recording its sound waves. We
then replay the performance by replaying the sound, in the same way as
we replay a photograph by looking at the light it reflects. The notion
of persistence in E24 is inherited from E77, where it is clarified as
persistent identity, not persistent form or state. If the performance
was a conceptual object, then it would not be able to be recorded,
only described. The “conceptual performance” is the equivalent of the
E36 Visual Item – the same “Coca-Cola logo” exists in all physical
objects that show the visual item. I would thus add Exx_Auditory_Item
to mirror E36. One might then have an additional subclass of both E36
and Exx to represent performances more generally, where the visual and
auditory aspects are both represented, such as theatre or dance, or
that might be captured by video-recording the orchestra rather than
just recording the sound.
Rob
*From: *Crm-sig <crm-sig-boun...@ics.forth.gr> on behalf of Athanasios
Velios <a.vel...@arts.ac.uk>
*Reply-To: *"a.vel...@arts.ac.uk" <a.vel...@arts.ac.uk>
*Date: *Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 8:51 AM
*To: *crm-sig <Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
*Subject: *[Crm-sig] Design or Procedure and Physical Things
Dear all,
With the usual apologies for possibly having misunderstood or missed
something. I propose that the scope note of E29 Design or Procedure
changes from:
"... In particular it comprises plans for deliberate human activities
that may result in the modification or production of instances of *E24
Physical Thing*..."
to:
"... In particular it comprises plans for deliberate human activities
that may result in new instances of *E71 Man-Made Thing or E7
Activity*..."
Reason for including E7:
One of the current examples under E29 is:
"the musical notation for Beethoven’s “Ode to Joy”"
I do not see how the musical notation can result in the production of a
physical thing. Also I think it is a contradiction to "P33 used specific
technique" for which the domain is E7 Activity (and also to F25
Performance Plan which is a sub-class of E29 Design or Procedure).
Reason for including E71:
Consider the example of using a digital camera. I setup the camera
following instructions. But when I shoot the image (as explained in
CRMdig) I create a new information object and not a physical thing.
Note: The current scope note says "may", but I take this to mean that a
physical thing may or may not be produced, and not that it may or may
not be a physical thing (i.e. to be something entirely different).
All the best,
Thanasis
This email and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended
recipient of this email and/or its attachments you must not take any
action based upon them and you must not copy or show them to anyone.
Please send the email back to us and immediately and permanently
delete it and its attachments. Where this email is unrelated to the
business of University of the Arts London or of any of its group
companies the opinions expressed in it are the opinions of the sender
and do not necessarily constitute those of University of the Arts
London (or the relevant group company). Where the sender's signature
indicates that the email is sent on behalf of UAL Short Courses
Limited the following also applies: UAL Short Courses Limited is a
company registered in England and Wales under company number 02361261.
Registered Office: University of the Arts London, 272 High Holborn,
London WC1V 7EY
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr | Vox:+30(2810)391625 |
Research Director | Fax:+30(2810)391638 |
| Email: mar...@ics.forth.gr |
|
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 |
--------------------------------------------------------------
