Dear all,
A comment to the artist discussion:
It has been a discussion in linguistics about mental types vs all information
is in the text/utterance. My impression is that most scholars agree that agreed
types are used by humans in language communication. This does not imply that
all such types exist independently of the language(s) in question.
It is well known form bilingual lexicography that the concepts (types) in two
languages are not in a 1-1 correspondence. A simple example is the idea that a
dictionary explaining language A for users of language B cannot be reversed to
a dictionary for A users to understand language B, similarly for dictionaries
design to support production.
AAT has the ambition to be universal in the sense that the concept identifiers
in the English original is kept in the German, French, Dutch versions. This is
not problematic for higher level concepts. However, it is my impression that as
closer a term is to an everyday word in a language, the more problematic it is.
Artist is an example. In Norwegian Art (kunst) and Artist (kunstner) are
usually used about fine arts. In Russian художник (khudozhnik) has a much wider
meaning, and also including craftsman and designer.
"Villa" is another example.
In AAT:
Hierarchical Position:
Objects Facet
.... Built Environment (hierarchy name) (G)
…
............................................ rural houses (G)
............................................... country houses
(G)
.................................................... villas (G)
In the Swedish Rikstermbanken (term bank), we find the following definition
for villa
villa sv
DEFINITION: friliggande småhus [free standing (small) dwelling house]
In Sweden the definintion of “free standing” in this case is «not less than 4
meter from any other house and a “småhus” will typically have two floors and
100-200 square meters and is found in suburbs and very fare from Villa di
Medici.
All the concepts (including artist) mentioned above can be modelled as
instances of E55 but in most cases different instances as the
denotations/extensions are different
Best,
Christian-Emil
________________________________
From: Crm-sig <[email protected]> on behalf of Martin Doerr
<[email protected]>
Sent: 09 March 2019 19:40
To: Nicola Carboni
Cc: crm-sig
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] Issue 277 "artist"
On 3/9/2019 11:22 AM, Nicola Carboni wrote:
Dear Martin,
Nevertheless I like the "artist" example, because it is a vague attribution,
but useful. Exactly the things we prefer to put in E55 Type.
I am intrigued by the different ways someone may be identified as artist. It
reminds me the discourse about "my true mother" of George Lakoff in "Women,
Fire and Dangerous Things”. The question is of course, if we could find an
ontology as example which makes some objective ontological distinctions, such
as people having studied fine arts, or being organized in a community of
artists, or make a living by producing art. For reasoning with CRM classes, an
interesting question is, if we can infer an artist from her products, or e.g.,
awards, without classifying the person.
That is indeed a tricky definition, and I agree that should not rely on an
ontological commitment. In my opinion it should be dealt with a set of rules
formalised by each institution depending on their view/culture reflect the
conceptualisation of Artist.
From a functional perspective, N3 is in my opinion the best way to go. A brief
example would be:
{?X crm:P14_performed ?Y . ?Y crm:p2_has_type "exhibition".} => {?X a
ex:Artist.} .
it is pretty simple way to assign the class Artist to a person on the base of a
set of rules. Could that work?
Yes. I believe non-IT experts could best handle a graphical tool, on which
deduction paths could be highlighted.
Even the "?Y.?Y" above is distracting.
The only problem I see is that current automatic RDFS graphical visualizations
are cluttered with meaninglessly huge URIs and bad layout, huge arcs circling
around.
May be someone knows a good intuitive tool?
Cheers,
Martin
Best,
Nicola
On 8 Mar 2019, at 19:36, Martin Doerr
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 3/7/2019 11:02 PM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
Martin, all,
One thing to note about the dbpedia ontology is that it is derived from the
infobox sections of Wikipedia, mostly automatically.
So this could be a very artificial alignment, and I would not put too much
emphasis on it as a precedent.
Yes, I see.
Nevertheless I like the "artist" example, because it is a vague attribution,
but useful. Exactly the things we prefer to put in E55 Type.
I am intrigued by the different ways someone may be identified as artist. It
reminds me the discourse about "my true mother" of George Lakoff in "Women,
Fire and Dangerous Things". The question is of course, if we could find an
ontology as example which makes some objective ontological distinctions, such
as people having studied fine arts, or being organized in a community of
artists, or make a living by producing art.
For reasoning with CRM classes, an interesting question is, if we can infer an
artist from her products, or e.g., awards, without classifying the person.
Best,
Martin
Rob
From: Crm-sig
<[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> on behalf
of Martin Doerr <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
Date: Saturday, March 2, 2019 at 10:07 AM
To: crm-sig <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: [Crm-sig] Issue 277 "artist"
Dear All,
For the test about types there was a question in which context a class "Artist"
may have been defined. I found one in dbpedia:
http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Artist
I am not sure how to refer to this in our text. One may point to the utility of
replacing classes with types for the mapping.
Reading the properties of this artist definition carefully, one may ask which
of those are actually be restricted to artists, and which "make artists" out of
a person: the awards. The latter is obviously common reasoning, but we would
not populate the CRM with such secondary concepts for reasons of maintaining a
core.
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
--
------------------------------------
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
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
--
------------------------------------
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
