Dear Nicola, good question.
I think it could or should be integrated. I would however still
encourage communities to develop respective sets of subproperties as
computationally more effective alternative.
Best,
Martin
On 7/10/2020 12:27 PM, Nicola Carboni wrote:
Dear all,
Currently, the .1 property are expressed in CRMPC, as separate RDF
file which, however, use the same namespace of CRM
(http://www.cidoc-crm.org/cidoc-crm/).
The current dualism it appears to be confusing (specifically for first
time adopters), because both CRM and CRMPC encode, using RDF, classes
and properties of the ontology, but they are provided as separated files.
I was wondering if would not be better to integrate classes and
properties currently expressed in CRMPC within the official RDF of
CIDOC-CRM? Or, alternatively, should CRMPC get its own namespace?
Best,
Nicola
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[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]
Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
