Hi Martin,
> We use the “type" because it implies necessarily if it is a perdurant or > endurant, person etc. If it does not, it is ill-defined, and has no place > in a Thesaurus (see the AAT). > Unfortunately, I find many thesuri don't follow good ontological principles, so we are forced for workarounds, but okay. > If the categories of a thesaurus fit the CRM is a mapping problem. > > No problem for retrieval at all. Just a programmers job. > That job can be very expensive! > > Place types are relatively rare, such as "river" "lake", "city". The UMLS > system e.g., listed some decade ago I think 10 or 20 million types, but > less than 100 properties, corresponding to at most 200 classes. Therefore, > P2 is not "cheap", but it does never replace meaningful properties. > "Cheap" in "Cheap and Cheerful" is not a denigration... https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/cheap-and-cheerful Cheers, George >
_______________________________________________ Crm-sig mailing list Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
