Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata


In several cases we use "Compound" nodes carrying several classes that some people may consider to be disjoint

  1. BM represents a transfer as both E79_Part_Addition and E80_Part_Removal
  2. Some documents are represented as both E31_Document (conceptual object) and E84_Information_Carrier (its physical embodiment)
  3. Collections#Collection's Dual Nature are represented as both a physical collection of things (E24 Physical Man-Made Thing >
    E78_Collection) and its owner (E40_Legal_Body)

Therefore I recommended to the ECRM mlist that some of the owl:disjointWith statements should be removed from ECRM:

  1. E79_Part_Addition and E80_Part_Removal
  2. E18_Physical_Thing and E28_Conceptual_Object

Transfer as E79_Part_Addition and E80_Part_Removal

Transfer of ownership (or custody) often involves the Removal of an object from one collection and its Addition to another.
This is ONE event that should be modeled as ONE node, having both classes, and all attendant properties from both.

  • BM uses such represenation
  • (In Rembrandt we haven't encountered it, since the object exit from one collection is not correlated to the object entry into the next one)

Document as E31_Document and E84_Information_Carrier

Consider this example (<obj/2926> is a painting, and <obj/2926/document/1> is an XRay of it):

The reasons for such collapsing of E31_Document (conceptual object) and E84_Information_Carrier (its physical embodiment) are:

  • we have info about physical properties (keeper, location, size) that need E84
  • to say that the XRay documents the painting, that needs E31
  • E31 and E84 are one-to-one and we don't have any info about digitization
  • we want to save on nodes and complexity, so we equate E31 and E84, and usea self-link P128

Here's what Martin said about this:
"If you take something to be E18-E28 simultaneously, you must be sure in the future you will never have to distinguish between two carriers of the same thing.
So, as long as the X-Ray film, the E18, is used as only source of the information, everything works fine.
If you digitize the film, then it may become messy, but if digital representations are regarded to “show features of” the original, we do not run into a problem with the E18-E28 compound."

Enter labels to add to this page:
Please wait 
Looking for a label? Just start typing.