Issue 484: 7.0 preparation - missing examples

Posted by Steve on 28/2/2020

Hi Martin

I have created 2 examples one for a spacetime volume derived from an event and one derived from a physical object. I have added the extra step to time primitive to illustrate the difference between STV, Time-Span and Time Primitive in the hope that this will make things clearer to the user community. I welcome your comments on the approach.

·      The Spacetime Volume of the Battle of Waterloo 1815 P160 has temporal projection The Time-Span of the Battle of Waterloo [P82 at some time within Sunday, 18 June 1815 (E61 Time Primitive)]

·      the spatio-temporal trajectory of the H.M.S. Temeraire from its building in 1798 to its destruction in 1838 P160 has temporal projection The Time-Span of the existence of H.M.S. Temeraire [P82 at some time within 1798-1838 (E61 Time Primitive)]

Posted by Martin on 3/3/2020

Posted by Athina on 5/3/2020

E96 Purchase

the purchase of 10 okka of nails by the captain A. Syrmas on 18/9/1895 in Thessaloniki.

P179 had sales price (was sales price of)

the purchase of 10 okka of nails by the captain A. Syrmas on 18/9/1895 (E96) had sales price 20 piastre (grosi) (E97).

The specific examples were used from “Account Book of ship D.S.Skyliytsis 28/9/1895-19/10/1896 Captain A.Syrmas,Book no5; Inventory Number A.E 53/01, E.L.I.A, Athens” in the context of SEALIT project (http://www.sealitproject.eu/)

Posted by Martin on 9/3/2020

Hi Steve, what about these examples: 
P156 occupies (is occupied by)

Domain:             E18 Physical Thing

Range:                E53 Place

Subproperty of:    E18 Physical Thing. P157i (provides reference space for) :E53 Place

Subproperty of:    E18 Physical Thing:P53 has former or current location (is former or current location of): E53 Place

Quantification: one to one (0,1:1,1)

Scope note:  This property describes the largest volume in space, an instance of E53 Place, that an instance of E18 Physical Thing has occupied at any time during its existence, with respect to the reference space relative to the physical thing itself. This allows for describing the thing itself as a place that may contain other things, such as a box that may contain coins. In other words, it is the volume that contains all the points which the thing has covered at some time during its existence. The reference space for the associated place must be the one that is permanently at rest (P157 is at rest relative to) relative to the physical thing. For instances of E19 Physical Objects it is the one which is at rest relative to the object itself, i.e. which moves together with the object. For instances of E26 Physical Feature it is one which is at rest relative to the physical feature itself and the surrounding matter immediately connected to it. Therefore there is a 1:1 relation between the instance E18 Physical Thing and the instance of E53 Place it occupies. We include in the occupied space the space filled by the matter of the physical thing and all its inner spaces.

This property implies the fully developed path from E18 Physical Thing through P196 defines, E92 Spacetime Volume, P161 has spatial projection, E53 Place. However, in contrast to P156 occupies, the property P161 has spatial projection does not constrain the reference space of the referred instance of E53 Place.

In contrast to P156 occupies, for the property P53 has former or current location the following holds:

·        It does not constrain the reference space of the referred instance of E53 Place.

·        It identifies a possibly wider instance of E53 Place at which a thing is or has been for some unspecified time span.

·        If the reference space of the referred instance of E53 Place is not at rest with respect to the physical thing found there, the physical thing may move away after some time to another place and/or may have been at some other place before. The same holds for the fully developed path from E18 Physical Thing through Pxxx defines, E92 Spacetime Volume, P161 has spatial projection, E53 Place.

In First Order Logic:

P156(x,y) ⊃ E53(y)

                           P156(x,y) ⊃ E18(x)

P156 (x,y) = [E18(x) ∧ E53(y) ∧ P196(x,z) ∧ P161(z,y) ∧ P157(y,x)]

Example:

Burg Eltz (english: Eltz Castle) near Koblenz, Germany P156 occupies the space within the outer walls of Burg Eltz since 1661AD (E53) (the castle has been extended from the 12th century until 1661AD and not been destroyed up to present, containing buildings from various periods)

The Saint Titus reliquary P156 occupies the space of the Saint Titus reliquary (the reliquary is currently kept in the Saint Titus Church in Heraklion, Crete since 1966 and contains the skull of Saint Titus)

Posted by Martin on 11/3/2020

On 3/10/2020 12:08 AM, Stephen Stead wrote:
>
> May I suggest the following minor refinement
>
> Martin’s centroid for Kastoria (E53) P168 place is defined by [40°30'55"N 21°15'47"E] (a point in the lake of Kastoria at the geographic centre of the area covered by the city)
>
> Also could/should we make Martin’s centroid the exact centre of Martin’s square?

Here it is:

Martin’s centroid for Kastoria (E53) P168 place is defined by [40°31'01.5"N 21°15'48"E] (a point in the lake of Kastoria in the centre of the area covered by the city)

Alexander v. Humboldt's measurement for the Plaza Mayor in Cumaná, Sucre,Venezuela 1799-1800AD (E53) P168 place is defined by [10°27'52"N 66°30'02"W] (actually 260km west of Cumaná)

Citation: Humboldt, Alexander von : Die Südamerika-Reise (the only German edition authorised by A. v. Humboldt): Original titel: Reise in die Äquinoktial-Gegenden des Neuen Kontinents (German Edition) . eClassica. Kindle Edition. 2015

and P189:
Alexander v. Humboldt's measurement for the Plaza Mayor in Cumaná, Sucre,Venezuela 1799-1800AD (E53) P189 approximates the Plaza Mayor in Cumaná (probably today's Plaza Andrés Eloy Blanco. Von Humboldt's measurement had an error of 260km to the west).

Posted by Martin on 11/3/2020

Dear All,

Here my example (geojson, gml, xsd)  for P169. Gerald, is there a good syntax in geosparql or WKT?

Gerald, do have an example of an expanding city, that could easily be approximated by two STV boxes?

Posted by Gerald on 27/3/2020

Dear Martin and all,

In GML (http://www.ogc.org/standards/gml) it is possible to express temporal geometries and GeoSPARQL has the property “asGML".
I created a GML example of Innsbruck with a geometry for 1805 (2D to keep it easy) and another geometry for 2020. 
The GML was created using QGIS and uses other xml tags (ogr: //ogr.maptools.org/) from GDAL (https://gdal.org/) that make it possible to load and display the data in QGIS. 
I added the original GML tag for gml:TimeInstant to by compliant with the gml specification. It was not present in the original export from QGIS.
That’s one of the problems with GML specifications. Not everything is implemented in software packages. 

Geojson became an OGC standard in 2019 (http://www.ogc.org/standards/eo-geojson) and has possibilities to encode temporal geometries within its properties, but that is no more than attributes.

We could also look into the OGC “Moving features” which seem very similar to our Spacetime Volumes: 
OGC® Moving Features
https://www.ogc.org/standards/movingfeatures/

There is an XML and a csv standard for encoding moving features, but I believe the extension for geojson could be the most promising: 
"OGC Moving Features Encoding Extension – JSON"

https://docs.opengeospatial.org/bp/16-140r1/16-140r1.html

Example:

{

    "type": "MovingPoint",

    "coordinates": [ [100.0, 0.0], [101.0, 0.0], [101.0, 1.0]],

    "datetimes": ["2011-07-14T22:01:01Z", "2011-07-14T23:01:01Z", "2011-07-15T00:01:01Z"],

    "interpolations": ["Linear"] // an interpolation method during the period of datetimes

}

I hope this helped,
 

Posted by Christian Emil on 31/3/2020

Dear all,

Here is an example of a terminus post quem and teminus ante quem taken form Regesta Norvegica (somewhat complicated)

Best,

Christian-Emil

Regesta number: 601

Date [1422 – before 1426 May 20?] ¹

Vidimus [confirmed copy] by Ture Karlsson, Karl Ulvsson, Eivind Torgilsson, Gyrd Toresson, Tjodolv Gyrdsson and Tord Toraldsson: Transcript of RN II no. 1075 [DNVI No. 374].

Printed: DN VI No. 483 (incorrectly dated [around 1420-1440]).

¹ Term[inus] p[ost] q[uem] is based on the fact that the issuer Ture Karlsson first appeared in Norway in 1422 (cf. no. 193 earlier).

Term[inus] a[nte] q[uem] is based on the following reasoning: 

Issuer Karl Ulvsson, Catherine Ulvsdaughter's brother, is first mentioned in 1410 (RN IX no. 822). Catherine Ulvsdaughter confirms her mother's gift of Forsvik mill [to Vadstena Convent in Sweden] in a letter dated May 20, 1426 (cf regesta no. 602 later) . Her husband, Herlaug Petersson,   makes a confirmed copy [vidius] date July 11, 1426  of a letter her father Ulv Holmgeirsson's received in 1364 (RN VI no. 1034).[Karl Ulvsson’s and Catherine Ulvsdaughter's father received  this  letter from the king confirming that he got Forsvik​ mill back from some third person]  This indicates that Karl Ulvsson died sometime before May 20, 1426. Otherwise normally he, as heir, would have been responsible for both the letter of confirmation [vidimus]  and the testimony of the gift.

Posted by George on 4/1/2020

Dear all,

Here is a possible format for the e-vote. Do you find it intuitive enough? I think that we need to have them input their email addresses because we can’t have just anybody voting…

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf0_502Sxk0gpoRC58YnT18Vp8E2qbH6skBiG1yboCEDplpTQ/viewform

Posted by George on 2/4/2020

Dear Martin et al.,

Ok now the examples are in one form and the new property proposal is another form.

Examples:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf0_502Sxk0gpoRC58YnT18Vp8E2qbH6skBiG1yboCEDplpTQ/viewform

New Property:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSceFwCsX8HnsO551sSXh4Iol0wRLCyDyxFsbRD-mp-wuy21FA/viewform

I imagine we don't want to create endless vote forms, so do we have an idea of the things that nee to be voted for v 7.0? I think we should do all of them at the same time in the least amounts of forms possible so people don't get lost.

Other thoughts: it is not really possible to have an option, yes, no, veto and other with google forms. We will have to follow the logic that Eleni suggested which is pretty much the same anyhow. Either clearly vote yes or no, if you have a comment then choose the comment option and write whatever caveats you like. The most extreme caveat is veto. Since if you veto you should say why, this seems sensible.

For the new property question, I had to vary the form some. I think it still makes sense though it is a touch repetitive. 

Another good suggestion Eleni made was that it would be good to only email the actual voting members with these forms rather than just anyone who is on the SIG list (they are not all members or membership has little meaning). Do we have a mailing list of just the actual members of SIG?

Posted by Thanasis on 6/4/2020

One can split Google Forms is separate pages, where you need to click "next" to move to the following question, but I have just done an input persistency test and the answers do not seem to remain in the form if the session ends. So although it will make the process more manageable in terms of the size of the form, it might create a false sense of security regarding persistence of data.

Posted by George on 15/4/2020

Dear all,

I split, then, the vote form into three:

Presence Examples

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf0_502Sxk0gpoRC58YnT18Vp8E2qbH6skBiG1yboCEDplpTQ/viewform 

Miscellaneous Examples

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeOKih5BaD4e3Y9lakqa51Cmdtq8yJ6S8GkVtAPHidoMhntqA/viewform 

STV and Temporal Properties Examples

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf07FGPi5lbER3AJlEAXidAMYvrRQTQi2Tl1pf_XpQU_9UfiQ/viewform

Reasonable?

Following votes were called on April 16th, 2020 with a deadline of April 30th, 2020, The CRM SIG editorial team met virtually to evaluate the results and put them into action. The added examples belong to the following categories and can be found here

1 Miscellaneous Examples

2 Space Time Volume and Temporal Properties Examples

3 Presence Class and Related Properties Examples

Generally the votes had to do with the addition of examples to properties and classes in the standard in view of the upcoming release of version 7.0 of CIDOC CRM. 

30 April 2020

Posted by Martin on 9/10/2020

The Saint Titus reliquary (E22) P196 defines the spacetime volume of the Saint Titus reliquary [the reliquary is currently kept in the Saint Titus Church in Heraklion, Crete since 1966 and contains the skull of Saint Titus]

Could be continued by a presence example. The bones where inside from....on. Does anybody have access to data who produced this reliquary and when? 

Posted by Martin on 10/10/2020

Dear All,

I think we need some Bronze Age archaeologist. E.g.:

"The settlement of the city of Assur (Ashur) P174 starts before the end of (ends after the start of) The Tenth Dynasty of Egypt."

There are some 200 - 300 years differences in the chronology of the First Intermediate Period, and Assur is dated to "about 2500 BC".

Comparative finds could provide nice examples for the temporal primitives, but I have no access to such details.

There are also Egyptian finds in Minoan Crete that can provide relative chronology.

Posted by Martin on 15/10/2020

Dear All,

I further propose:

Troy VII (E7) P183 ends before the start of Troy VIII (E7)  [uninhabited for some 200 years]

The settlement of the city of Assur (Ashur) (E7) P174 starts before the end of  The Tenth Dynasty of Egypt. (E4) [There are some 200 - 300 years differences in the chronology of the First Intermediate Period, and Assur is dated to "about 2500 BC”]

Archaeologists should have more examples of relative chronology, e.g. by imported objects etc.

Posted by Lida on 22/10/2020

Here is the additional information for Martin's example about Saint Titus reliquary

The Saint Titus reliquary (E22) P196 defines the spacetime volume of the Saint Titus reliquary [the reliquary has been produced by the workshop of the Vogiatzis brothers located at Monastiraki in Athens as container for the skull of Saint Titus in 1966, which has been placed into it and since then continues to fall within the container's spacetime volume. The reliquary with the skull has been kept in the Saint Titus Church in Heraklion, Crete since 1966] (Fisher&Garvey 2010)

[https://www.panotis.gr/index.php/2016/06/29/the-holy-spirit-stressed-summit-of-crete/]

In the 49th joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM SIG and SO/TC46/SC4/WG9; 42nd FRBR – CIDOC CRM Harmonization meeting, MD & AK presented their HW (missing examples for temporal relaton primitive properties). The sig discussed the examples proposed for P175 and accepted them with minor edits. 

The examples for P175 are to be introduced in the CRM (v7.1.1). 

• The production of the scarab seal found in Poros in a context of LMIIIB (E12) starts after or with the start of Tutankhamun period (1332-1323 B.C) (E4).
  [The scarab stamp seal found in Poros was associated with finds dated to the LMIIIB period. The seal is dated to the Tutankhamun period or later because it belongs to the scarabs of type “nh.s n Jmn”: During Akhenaten period, the production of this type of scarab seal stopped (the name of Amun is not referred to during his reign). Therefore, the scarab cannot have been produced before the Tutankhamun period and is probably a later production] (Karetsou, 2000)

• The production of the cylindrical seal of the first Dynasty of Babylon found in Tholos B in Platanos (E12) starts after or with the start of the Hammurabi period of the kingdom (E4). [Of the cylindrical seal of the first Dynasty of Babylon found in tholos B in Platanos believed to connect king Hammurabi with the MM I period. Specifically, although the finding is believed to have been found in a MM I layer, it contained material from the MM III/YM I period. Therefore, the seal may be from the Hammurabi period or, it may be from a later period.] (Walberg, 1992.)

References: 

• Karetsou, A. (2000). Kriti-Aigyptos: politismikoi desmoi trion chilietion. Athens: Archaeological Museum of Herakleion.
• Walberg G. 1992. The Finds at Tell el-Dabʿa and Middle Minoan Chronology. Ägypten und Levante / Egypt and the Levant, 157-159

Properties P176, P182, P184, P185 are still missing an example. 

March 2021

Post by Christian-Emil Ore (25 January 2022)

Dear all,

The following properties 

• P174 starts before the end of, 
• P184 ends before or with the end of,
• P185 ends before the end of

have no examples.  We need a community effort to find good example by Monday 31st.

Best,

Christian-Emil

In the 52nd CIDOC CRM & 45th FRBRoo SIG meeting, the SIG reviewed the examples for P174, P184 and P185 (HW by CEO) and decided that they be added to both CIDOC CRM v7.1.2 (ISO) and v7.2.1 (community).

HW: CEO to come up with examples for P176 starts before the start of (starts after the start of). 

The examples can be found below

P174 starts before the end of
The building of the current St. Peters in Rome (E7) starts before the end of the demolition of the old 4th c. St. Peters (E6, E7)
P184 ends before or with the end of
The reign/life of Harold II (E4) ends before or with the end of the Battle of Hastings (E7)
P185 ends before the end of (ends after the end of)
Godstow Abbey, Oxfordshire as a working abbey (E4 Period) ends before the end of the reign of Henry VIII (E4 Period).
 

February, 2022