Dear Francesco,

You have raised some interesting points which, I think, need discussion
(but after closing this issue 😃), including:
- what was the motivation of introducing property classes
- how can we tackle ambiguity of PCs (classes vs properties, etc etc)
- why not directly using the standard RDF reification vocabulary
<https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_reificationvocab>, where properties
can be attached to statements/triples.
I will include your comments in the working document of Issue 588, with a
suggestion to open a new issue for discussing and working on them.

Best regards,
Pavlos


On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 8:39 PM Francesco Beretta via Crm-sig <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear Pavlos, all
>
> reconsidering this question of the properties of properties and the
> proposed solution of the properties-classes remain some doubts and
> interrogations to me, in particular in relation with the best practices in
> the field of serialization of conceptual models in RDF.
>
> Metadata about properties as instances, i.e. statement, can be expressed
> with the standard RDF reification or the new RDF* standard.
>
> What is the best practice in the RDF community to express this kind of
> properties of properties (and also dates, etc. added to properties in
> conceptual models) ?
>
>
> And furthermore: are the CRM properties of properties just 'metadata' or
> do they carry some additional ontological substance ?
>
> The technical solution of 'PC' does not remove all ambiguity: are they in
> the end properties or classes? and when we talk about adding, as now,
> labels and scope notes to the PCs they do becomes classes, don't they? what
> is then their substance? just to be reified properties?
>
> One could come to think that in fact there is more substance but not
> totally and adequately expressed, and that should be more carefully
> analyzed like in the case of P14.1 in the role of: E55 Type or P107.1 kind
> of member: E55 Type.
>
> Take the example of  P3.1 has type: E55 Type — "This property allows
> differentiation of specific notes, e.g., “construction”, “decoration” etc."
> (thank you Pavlos for the work you've done).
>
> If P3 is not just taken as a CRM replacement of *rdfs:comment*, shouldn't
> the so called associated 'note' be modelled as an information object of
> type 'damage description' (chipped at edge of handle) related to the
> corresponding human-made object by P129 is about. Or 'chipped at edge of
> handle' would be a E3 Condition or State and the 'note' its description?
>
> But because P3 has E62 String as a range, which "is not further elaborated
> upon within the model", it becomes —P3 I mean— quite relevant as it
> captures the characterization of the item itself, its internal structures,
> appearance etc.
>
> So, again, are there any best practices in other communities of RDF
> experts that apply to these types of situations that should be analyzed
> before further specifying a notion of PC that doesn't seem totally
> justified, or raising ontological analisis issues, instead of using simple
> RDF reification?
>
> Best
>
> Francesco
>
> Le 01.12.22 à 17:35, Pavlos Fafalios via Crm-sig a écrit :
>
> Dear all,
>
> Please find my revised homework for issue 588
> <https://cidoc-crm.org/Issue/ID-588-common-policy-method-for-implementing-the-.1-properties-of-base-and-extensions-in-rdf>
> below:
>
> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1b0wW70xo2wjxNlWHYDRl7nr-fzYXTchN?usp=share_link
>
> Feel free to add your comments or send your feedback!
>
> Best regards,
> Pavlos
>
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 11:23 AM Pavlos Fafalios <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Mark, all,
>>
>> I agree, we need to make clear which constructs of the RDF are not part
>> of CIDOC-CRM (especially since they make use of the same namespace).
>> One way is to add a note in the beginning of the file. Another way would
>> be to provide them through a different namespace (not sure if this is a
>> good solution--needs some thinking).
>>
>> This is also a good reason for having them in a different RDF file:  all
>> classes and properties in this file, except the .1 properties, are not part
>> of CIDOC-CRM, while the .1 properties have a 'domain' class that is also
>> not part of CIDOC-CRM.
>>
>> Best,
>> Pavlos
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 5:53 PM Mark Fichtner <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> nice work, thanks! I think for RDF this is a valid representation,
>>> although I am not very happy to add properties that are not in the cidoc
>>> crm directly and that are not part of the language itself (like in this
>>> case crm:P03_reifies). As a user/reader of the rdf it is simply hard to
>>> understand what is part of the cidoc crm itself and what comes due to
>>> "workarounds". Even in as a new ontology/file/addon it mixes cidoc crm and
>>> non-cidoc crm things.
>>>
>>> Also we have a reification concept (E13 Attribute Assignment), I am not
>>> sure if we need even more of these.
>>>
>>> I'm looking forward to the discussion!
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Mark Fichtner
>>>
>>> Germanisches Nationalmuseum
>>>
>>> Am Mo., 12. Sept. 2022 um 14:22 Uhr schrieb Pavlos Fafalios via Crm-sig <
>>> [email protected]>:
>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> Please find my homework for issue 588
>>>> <https://cidoc-crm.org/Issue/ID-588-common-policy-method-for-implementing-the-.1-properties-of-base-and-extensions-in-rdf>
>>>> in the below link (as well as in the issues' folder):
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oQRkmMUgyOeDsn3ZbPuQ__VtbigS9DVsHjmOtvx16uo/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>
>>>> Apologies for the delay! Feel free to add your comments or send your
>>>> feedback!
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Pavlos
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Pavlos Fafalios
>>>>
>>>> Postdoctoral researcher (Marie Curie IF - Project ReKnow
>>>> <https://reknow.ics.forth.gr/>)
>>>> Centre for Cultural Informatics & Information Systems Laboratory
>>>> Institute of Computer Science - FORTH
>>>>
>>>> Visiting Lecturer
>>>> Department of Management Science & Technology
>>>> Hellenic Mediterranean University
>>>>
>>>> Web: http://users.ics.forth.gr/~fafalios/
>>>> Email: [email protected]
>>>> Address: N. Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton, 70013 Heraklion, Greece
>>>> Tel: +30-2810-391619
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Crm-sig mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Pavlos Fafalios
>>
>> Postdoctoral researcher (Marie Curie IF - Project ReKnow
>> <https://reknow.ics.forth.gr/>)
>> Centre for Cultural Informatics & Information Systems Laboratory
>> Institute of Computer Science - FORTH
>>
>> Visiting Lecturer
>> Department of Management Science & Technology
>> Hellenic Mediterranean University
>>
>> Web: http://users.ics.forth.gr/~fafalios/
>> Email: [email protected]
>> Address: N. Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton, 70013 Heraklion, Greece
>> Tel: +30-2810-391619
>>
>>
>
> --
> Pavlos Fafalios
>
> Postdoctoral researcher (Marie Curie IF - Project ReKnow
> <https://reknow.ics.forth.gr/>)
> Centre for Cultural Informatics & Information Systems Laboratory
> Institute of Computer Science - FORTH
>
> Visiting Lecturer
> Department of Management Science & Technology
> Hellenic Mediterranean University
>
> Web: http://users.ics.forth.gr/~fafalios/
> Email: [email protected]
> Address: N. Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton, 70013 Heraklion, Greece
> Tel: +30-2810-391619
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Crm-sig mailing 
> [email protected]http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Crm-sig mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
>


-- 
Pavlos Fafalios

Postdoctoral researcher
Centre for Cultural Informatics & Information Systems Laboratory
Institute of Computer Science - FORTH

Visiting Lecturer
Department of Management Science & Technology
Hellenic Mediterranean University

Web: http://users.ics.forth.gr/~fafalios/
Email: [email protected]
Address: N. Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton, 70013 Heraklion, Greece
Tel: +30-2810-391619
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig

Reply via email to