Thanks Martin!

I would be happy with the temporary being explicit for the keeper, but then we 
have an inconsistency between location and custodian.  Would the same apply for 
location as well?

This would mean that we can be clear that there is an exceptional, temporary 
circumstance that should be expected to revert back to the normal circumstances 
in the future. I have a temporary work location of my home, but when this pesky 
virus has gone, it will go back to being my office at the Getty Center.

In terms of the types of transfers … yes, but there might be many types of 
transfers which are either permanent or temporary. It would be nightmarish to 
try and track which were which without some consistent method to flag them.  
Indeed Guernica’s travels around the world are a great example of the 
complexity here!

Rob


From: Crm-sig <[email protected]> on behalf of Martin Doerr 
<[email protected]>
Date: Saturday, March 7, 2020 at 7:48 AM
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] NEW ISSUE: Normal Custodian Of?

Dear Robert, All,

I see the point, but propose another solution. I have even proposed to 
deprecate "current permanent location", because the "permanent" is hard to be 
objectified, and here extremely specific to a certain inventory practice.

I'd rather argue, that the current keeper of an object that is handed out for 
loan stays obliged for safe-guarding the object. So, a property "has temporary 
keeper" would be much more informative, and positively states what is 
happening. We should just accept a "current keeper" being simultaneaously in 
charge with a "temporary keeper", and the event of change of custody to the 
respective temporary keeper will specify anyhow the character of the transfer.

If transfers of custody are completely registered, as the examples suggest, 
there is no need for further differentiations of stateful properties, because 
the type of transfer can register that.

In any case, think of "Guernica" ! Reality can be very complex;-)

Best,

Martin

On 3/6/2020 12:10 AM, Robert Sanderson wrote:

Another use case which has come up:

A painting is given from the Paintings department, which is the normal 
custodian, to the Conservation department, in order to perform conservation 
work on it.

The Conservation department has custody of it, but the Paintings department is 
still the normal custodian.  The ownership of the object doesn’t change. And 
potentially the physical location of it doesn’t either, if the conservation 
work is being done in place in the gallery, such as the current work on the 
Nightwatch at the Rijksmuseum, or Blue Boy at the Huntingdon here in California.

Rob


From: George Bruseker 
<[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 6:14 AM
To: Robert Sanderson <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
Cc: crm-sig <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] NEW ISSUE: Normal Custodian Of?

It seems to make sense to raise as an issue. The case does seem to come up 
reasonably frequently. The parallel seems convincing. For the moment we could 
cover temporal elements by initiating the existing of the property via an E13 
attribute assignment (if we had such info).





On Feb 15, 2020, at 2:33 AM, Robert Sanderson 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:


Apologies, I should have put NEW ISSUE in the subject for this originally.

As a quick proposal to discuss:

With P54 has current permanent location as a precedent, I would propose a Pxx 
has current permanent custodian as a new property to manage the knowledge 
described in the email below.

Happy to work on a scope note for it if that’s a useful thing to add to the 
ontology.

Rob

From: Robert Sanderson <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 at 12:24 PM
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Normal Custodian Of?


Dear fellow SIG folks,

Happy new year 😊

A question came up here as to how to record the normal custodian of an object, 
as opposed to the current custodian.

For example, if we have custody of an object but it’s a permanent loan from a 
donor, and we lend it to another organization for an exhibition, then the owner 
doesn’t change (still the donor, probably wanting to remain anonymous) and 
there’s a transfer of custody from ourselves to the exhibiting organization.  
If that’s a travelling exhibit, it might pass through several custodians before 
it should eventually return to us.

Is there a way to track this not-quite-an-owner but 
not-just-the-current-custodian state?  The only way that I can see is to model 
the right of permanent custody separate from the right of temporary custody… 
but then we re-enter the rights and temporal validity arena.  Perhaps this 
would be another motivating use case for moving forward with that work?

Many thanks for your thoughts,

Rob

--
Rob Sanderson,  Semantic Architect  |  Getty Digital  |  
getty.edu<http://getty.edu/>
<image001.jpg>
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig


CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Getty. Do not click links or 
open attachments unless you verify the sender and know the content is safe.






_______________________________________________

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

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Getty. Do not click links or 
open attachments unless you verify the sender and know the content is safe.


_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig

Reply via email to