+1 from me. This looks like a very good addition that would separate the usage of the more general p2_has_type for classifications such as “Valuation” or “Automated” and the more technical assignment of the exact relationship between the two resources in the model.
Agree that a non CRM example would be valuable, but not essential. Rob From: Crm-sig <[email protected]> on behalf of Martin Doerr <[email protected]> Date: Sunday, March 3, 2019 at 9:35 AM To: crm-sig <[email protected]> Subject: [Crm-sig] Issue 367: E13 Attribute Assignment Dear All, Here my homework, a property to denote which kind of property the attribute assignment is about. Old definition of E13: E13 Attribute Assignment Subclass of: E7 Activity Superclass of: E14 Condition Assessment E15 Identifier Assignment E16 Measurement E17 Type Assignment Scope note: This class comprises the actions of making assertions about one property of an object or any single relation between two items or concepts. The type of the property asserted to hold between two items or concepts can be described by the property P2 has type. For example, the class describes the actions of people making propositions and statements during certain scientific/scholarly procedures, e.g. the person and date when a condition statement was made, an identifier was assigned, the museum object was measured, etc. Which kinds of such assignments and statements need to be documented explicitly in structures of a schema rather than free text, depends on whether this information should be accessible by structured queries. This class allows for the documentation of how the respective assignment came about, and whose opinion it was. Note that all instances of properties described in a knowledge base are the opinion of someone. Per default, they are the opinion of the team maintaining the knowledge base. This fact must not individually be registered for all instances of properties provided by the maintaining team, because it would result in an endless recursion of whose opinion was the description of an opinion. Therefore, the use of E13 Attribute Assignment marks the fact, that the maintaining team is in general neutral to the validity of the respective assertion, but registers someone else’s opinion and how it came about. All properties assigned in such an action can also be seen as directly relating the respective pair of items or concepts. Multiple use of E13 Attribute Assignment may possibly lead to a collection of contradictory values. All cases of properties in this model that are also described indirectly through a subclass of E13 Attribute Assignment are characterised as "short cuts" of a path via this subclass. This redundant modelling of two alternative views is preferred because many implementations may have good reasons to model either the action of assertion or the short cut, and the relation between both alternatives can be captured by simple rules. Examples: § the assessment of the current ownership of Martin Doerr’s silver cup in February 1997 Properties: P140 assigned attribute to (was attributed by): E1 CRM Entity P141 assigned (was assigned by): E1 CRM Entity ========================================================================================= Revision of the first paragraph of the Scope note: Scope note: This class comprises the actions of making assertions about one property of an object or any single relation between two items or concepts. The type of the property asserted to hold between two items or concepts can be described by the property Pxxx assigned property type. Pxxx assigned property type Domain: E13 Attribute Assignment Range: E55 Type Subproperty of:E1 CRM Entity. P2 has type: E55 Type Quantification: many to many, necessary (1,n:0,n) Scope note: This property associates an instance of E13 Attribute Assignment with the type of property or relation that this assignment maintains to hold between the item to which it assigns an attribute and the attribute itself. Note that the properties defined by the CIDOC CRM also constitute instances of E55 Type themselves. The direction of the assigned property type is understood to be from the attributed item (the range of property P140 assigned attribute to) to the attribute item (the range of the property P141 assigned ). More than one property type may be assigned between two items. Examples: § February 1997 Current Ownership Assessment of Martin Doerr’s silver cup (E13) assigned property type P52 has former or current owner (is former or current keeper of) (E55) § 01 June 1997 Identifier Assignment of the silver cup donated by Martin Doerr (E15) assigned property type P48 has preferred identifier (is preferred identifier of) (E55) In First Order Logic: Pxxx(x,y) ⊃ E13(x) Pxxx(x,y) ⊃ E55(y) ==================================================================================== I assume an example with a property type not defined in the CRM may be useful. Best, Martin -- ------------------------------------ Dr. Martin Doerr Honorary Head of the 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 Vox:+30(2810)391625 Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
