Hi Rob / Martin, Yes, Rob provides a nice instance example.
Again, I just want to explore whether such a property has applications beyond this scope. Perhaps it isn't needed but if we look at more examples maybe a generalization will arise. Best, George On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 7:53 PM Robert Sanderson <azarot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Let me try and explain my understanding > > There are events, such as the auction of a specific lot, in which the > objects in the lot are offered for sale. > > That event might result in the transfer of ownership of the objects in the > lot from their current owner to the new owner, but they might not -- there > might be no bidders, the reserve price might not be met, etc. At which > point there is no transfer of ownership at all, and hence we should not > create an E8 Acquisition because there was no change in ownership. > > So ... we have established that the auction of the lot is not the same > entity as the E8 acquisition, which might be triggered by the auction of > lot. Let's just call it an E7 Activity. > > Now, lets assume that we do not know anything at all about that > Acquisition. So, much like the other *_of_type properties, we don't want to > instantiate an E8 which was triggered by the E7 but with no properties, but > instead to just say that the E7 resulted in an activity of_type Sale, or > of_type Return, or of_type Unknown, or of_type Bought In. > > Thus: > > <auction_of_lot1> a E7_Activity ; > carried_out_by <auction house> ; > triggered_activity_of_type <bought-in> . > > <bought-in> a E55_Type . > > Something like that? > > Rob > > > On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 12:28 PM Martin Doerr via Crm-sig < > crm-sig@ics.forth.gr> wrote: > >> Hi George, >> >> Please explain in more detail: >> >> On 1/6/2022 1:54 PM, George Bruseker wrote: >> >> Hi Martin, >> >> So the context for this is that there are provenance events being >> described and there is categorical knowledge derivable from the source >> material which a researcher might want to attribute to the event on what >> generally happened, the event ended in a sale, didn't end in a sale etc. >> >> What sort of event would "end in a sale", and why this event is not a >> sale itself, or why the sale itself is not an event in its own right. Can >> you cite an instance? Since I have happened to make full analysis of >> auction house actions and internet sales offers, I would need more details. >> >> I used a model which simply separates the sales offer from the legal >> transaction. The sale itself is not an outcome in this model, but motivated >> by the offer. Note that sales may be done without offer. Requests for sales >> are also different communications. >> >> I did not see a need to describe "outcome" in general terms. >> >> Further, could you better explain what you mean by "outcome" other than >> common language? Could you give a semantic definition, that would separate >> expextations from necessities, prerequisites and deterministic behaviour >> etc. ? >> >> I seriuosly do not understand that "outcome" has an ontological nature. >> For the time being I recognize it as a word of a language. >> >> >> The cheap and cheerful solution would just be to put this as a p2 has >> type... the typical solution. >> >> I principally disagree that cheap is cheerful. This is not a CRM >> Principle. P2 has type has never been a cheap solution. It is very precisly >> described as specialization without adding properties. I honestly do not >> understand what the type would pertain to, once it may not characterize the >> event, but an event to follow? >> >> >> It would nice to be more accurate though since the categorization isn't >> of the event itself but of its typical outcome. >> >> Exactly, if I would understand he sense of "outcome", I could follow you >> better. Note, that words and senses are different, and CRM is not modelling >> English language. >> >> So the case that comes up here is that provenance researchers want to >> classify the outcomes of an event by type regardless of their knowledge of >> the specifics of what went on in that event (because the source material >> may simply not allow them to know). >> >> Please provide instances. >> >> In this context, as type the outcome value will be used for >> categorization, how many events resulted in 'sale' how many in 'not sale'. >> >> In a real query scenario it would be asking questions like how many >> events of such and such a type had what kinds of outcome. Or maybe how many >> events with such and such a general purpose had such and such a general >> outcome. And then filter by time, space, people etc. >> >> It would be very interesting to seek other examples of general outcome >> recording for events in other contexts and see if this is a generally >> useful property to define. >> >> Still, you use the term "outcome", without explaining it, isn't it? I >> honestly do not regard it as self-evident, and I had already written that >> in previous messages. >> >> Best, >> >> Martin >> >> >> Best, >> >> George >> >> On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 7:28 PM Martin Doerr via Crm-sig < >> crm-sig@ics.forth.gr> wrote: >> >>> In continuation: >>> >>> "Sold", "completed", "incomplete" are very specific things. Objects are >>> offered for sale, which does not imply anything more than a sort of >>> publication. Actual purchase is a reaction on the offer. Purchase may >>> happen without offer. Actual change of ownership is modeled in the CRM. The >>> type of the event itself implies per default completion, such as >>> production, modification etc. >>> >>> The interesting case are processes which are known to be abandoned, but >>> what that means needs further investigation: How much of action has been >>> done and left historical traces? >>> >>> Processes which have not been finished during recording time are another >>> case. This is notoriously difficult, and resembles the "current" >>> discussions. We may need an "still ongoing", which should be harmonized >>> with the time-spans. >>> >>> Unknown parameters of an event, such as purchase from unknown to >>> unknown, do not need a n "outcome" property, but are just a specific event >>> an object has experienced. >>> >>> Isn't it? >>> >>> Other kinds of "outcomes" can be modifications, obligations, receiving >>> knowledge of, transfer of properties between "input-output" etc. May be it >>> is time to study if we can create a relatively comprehensive list. Some >>> events may only leave memory as only persistent thing, e.g. performances. >>> >>> To be discussed!😁 >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> On 12/31/2021 8:29 PM, Martin Doerr via Crm-sig wrote: >>> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> The missing property of outcome is so far deliberate in the CRM, because >>> we could not identify a general case. In contrast, there are models with >>> input-output semantics, but this is a very small subset. >>> >>> As in all such cases, we first need a collection of examples, and study >>> if there exist common semantics, or if it splits in a set of more specific >>> cases. I'd expect about 5 kinds of outcomes. If you give me the time, I can >>> present in the next meeting some. >>> >>> All the best, >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> >>> On 12/20/2021 6:45 PM, George Bruseker via Crm-sig wrote: >>> >>> Hi Thanasi, >>> >>> The proposal creates a consistent way of doing the 'type of' version of >>> a property that relates one particular to another particular. >>> >>> So each individual property: >>> https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P20-had-specific-purpose/version-7.1.1 >>> has its typed version like: >>> https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P21-had-general-purpose/version-7.1.1 >>> >>> Right? >>> >>> But I contend there IS NO particular property in regular CRM that >>> expresses the semantics I indicate above (therefore the proposal cannot >>> generate its typed version). P21 DOES NOT express the semantics I need >>> (hence also not P23). >>> >>> O13 triggers more or less does. in particular. But I need the >>> generalization. Triggered an outcome of type. >>> >>> Anyhow, not sure if anyone else needs this, but very common in my data. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> G >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 4:35 PM Athanasios Velios < >>> thana...@softicon.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> Following Athina's response and in relation to the question about the >>>> extant properties, I guess the "type of type" can be replicated with >>>> thesaurus related properties (e.g. P127 has broader term). I would >>>> consider the instances of E55 Type slightly differently to normal >>>> instances and not extent the idea to them. >>>> >>>> T. >>>> >>>> On 14/12/2021 19:42, George Bruseker wrote: >>>> > Hi Thanasi, >>>> > >>>> > Yes that's true. Good reminder. That might be a solution but then we >>>> > would need the particular property for expressing that two events are >>>> > causally connected. I avoided to put it in the last email so as not >>>> to >>>> > stir up to many semantic teapots. But obviously to have the general >>>> > property we should have the particular property. So we have for >>>> example >>>> > we have the particular properties: >>>> > >>>> > https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P20-had-specific-purpose/version-7.1.1 >>>> > < >>>> https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P20-had-specific-purpose/version-7.1.1> >>>> > and >>>> > https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P21-had-general-purpose/version-7.1.1 >>>> > <https://cidoc-crm.org/Property/P21-had-general-purpose/version-7.1.1 >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > so the analogy to this in my situation is probably >>>> > >>>> > O13 triggers (is triggered by) >>>> > https://cidoc-crm.org/crmsci/sites/default/files/CRMsci%20v.1.4.pdf >>>> > <https://cidoc-crm.org/crmsci/sites/default/files/CRMsci%20v.1.4.pdf> >>>> > and we need the analogy of p21 to make the model complete.... >>>> > >>>> > On another note out of curiosity, in the extension where every >>>> property >>>> > has a 'type of' property what happens with the extant 'type of' >>>> > properties? I assume there isn't any has general purpose of type >>>> > property... or is there? >>>> > >>>> > Cheers >>>> > >>>> > G >>>> > >>>> > On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 9:20 PM Athanasios Velios via Crm-sig >>>> > <crm-sig@ics.forth.gr <mailto:crm-sig@ics.forth.gr>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Hi George, all, >>>> > >>>> > As part of Linked Conservation Data (and with the help of Carlo, >>>> Martin >>>> > and Steve) we proposed the idea of Typed Properties which derive >>>> from >>>> > current CRM properties and always have E55 Type as range. >>>> > >>>> > E.g. "bears feature" → "bears feature of type" so that one can >>>> describe >>>> > the type of something without specifying the individual. It is >>>> very >>>> > economical in conservation where we want to avoid describing >>>> > hundreds of >>>> > individuals of similar types. >>>> > >>>> > We are still baking the exact impact of such a reduction from >>>> > individuals to Types. One issue in RDFS is the multitude of new >>>> > properties. There seems to be a simple implementation in OWL with >>>> > property paths. Not an immediate solution but a flag for more to >>>> come. >>>> > >>>> > All the best, >>>> > >>>> > Thanasis >>>> > >>>> > On 14/12/2021 15:49, George Bruseker via Crm-sig wrote: >>>> > > Hi all, >>>> > > >>>> > > I have situations in which I have events where the data >>>> curators >>>> > > describe events for which they have generic knowledge of the >>>> > outcome: >>>> > > sold, completed, incomplete, this sort of thing. So there is >>>> > knowledge >>>> > > but it is not knowledge of the particular next event but of a >>>> > general >>>> > > kind of outcome. >>>> > > >>>> > > We have properties like: P21 had general purpose (was purpose >>>> of) >>>> > which >>>> > > is very useful for when the data curator only has generic >>>> knowledge >>>> > > knowledge and not particular knowledge regarding purpose. This >>>> > seems a >>>> > > parallel to this case. >>>> > > >>>> > > Anybody else have this case and have an interest in a property >>>> > like 'had >>>> > > general outcome' or 'had outcome of type' that goes from Event >>>> to a >>>> > > Type? Or, better yet if possible, a solution that doesn't >>>> involve >>>> > a new >>>> > > property but that does meet this semantic need without too many >>>> > contortions? >>>> > > >>>> > > Best, >>>> > > >>>> > > George >>>> > > >>>> > > _______________________________________________ >>>> > > Crm-sig mailing list >>>> > > Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr> >>>> > > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >>>> > <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig> >>>> > > >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > Crm-sig mailing list >>>> > Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr <mailto:Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr> >>>> > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >>>> > <http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig> >>>> > >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Crm-sig mailing >>> listCrm-sig@ics.forth.grhttp://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: mar...@ics.forth.gr >>> Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Crm-sig mailing >>> listCrm-sig@ics.forth.grhttp://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: mar...@ics.forth.gr >>> Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Crm-sig mailing list >>> Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr >>> 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: mar...@ics.forth.gr >> Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Crm-sig mailing list >> Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr >> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig >> > > > -- > Rob Sanderson > Director for Cultural Heritage Metadata > Yale University >
_______________________________________________ Crm-sig mailing list Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
