# Issue 346: E28 Examples

posted by Robert Sanderson on 6/9/2017

Dear all,

The final two examples of E28 Conceptual Object are:

* ‘Maxwell equations’ [preferred subject access point from LCSH,

http://lccn.loc.gov/sh85082387, as of 19 November 2012]

* ‘Equations, Maxwell’ [variant subject access point, from the same source]

Is this meant to imply that these are /different/ E28s? The example was clearly explicitly chosen, so I wonder what it was meant to demonstrate, as I would have expected these to be two different Appellations for the same Conceptual Object.

Thanks for any clarifications,

Posted by Steve on 6/9/2017

Robert

I believe you are correct. They are different appellations of the same conceptual object. I think that the idea was to show that it was the E28 not the name that we were interested in. It obviously fails the usability test! Perhaps we could run the two examples together and say:-

‘Maxwell equations’ [preferred subject access point from LCSH, http://lccn.loc.gov/sh85082387, as of 19 November 2012] also known as ‘Equations, Maxwell’ [variant subject access point, from the same source]

Posted by Martin on 6/9/2017

Dear All,

Single quotes are consistently used throughout the text to denote strings, and not informal naming of things. E90 is a subclass of E28, and E41 subclass of E90, and therefore both strings are examples of E28, by virtue of being E90.

Obviously, the clarifying subclass is missing. I propose the examples to be:

§ Beethoven’s “Ode an die Freude” (Ode to Joy) (E73)

§ the definition of “ontology” in the Oxford English Dictionary (E73)

§ the knowledge about the victory at Marathon carried by the famous runner (E89)

§ ‘Maxwell equations’ [preferred subject access point from LCSH, (E41)

http://lccn.loc.gov/sh85082387, as of 19 November 2012]

§ ‘Equations, Maxwell’ [variant subject access point, from the same source] (E41)

§ Maxwell's equations (E89)

§ The encoding of Maxwells equations as in

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c4/Maxwell'sEquations.svg/500px-Maxwell'sEquations.svg.png (E73)

The point with the Maxwell Equations is that they have an exact logical identity regardless the notation. It was the names we are interested in. The example "Maxwell's equations" is already under E89. What we have missed is an example of the dozens of the equation notations, such as : https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c4/Maxwell'sEquations.svg/500px-Maxwell'sEquations.svg.png, which is an E73 (encoded meaning), in order to make the thing complete.

Posted by martin on 6/9/2017

On 9/6/2017 12:39 AM, Robert Sanderson wrote:

> Dear all,

>

> The final two examples of E28 Conceptual Object are:

>

> * ‘Maxwell equations’ [preferred subject access point from LCSH,

> http://lccn.loc.gov/sh85082387, as of 19 November 2012]

> * ‘Equations, Maxwell’ [variant subject access point, from the same source]

>

> Is this meant to imply that these are /different/ E28s? The example was clearly explicitly chosen, so I wonder what it was meant to demonstrate, as I would have expected these to be two different Appellations for the same Conceptual Object.

In addition to my previous remarks, yes, two different E28 naming another E28, realizing another E28;-)

Posted by Robert on 12/9/2017

Yup, the missing classes was the issue Thanks Martin!

Rob

In **39th meeting**, the examples of conceptual object are accepted. The sig decided that it should be an explanation note on the examples from Martin. The issue stays open until the explanation note will be written. Steve should review it.

Heraklion, October 2017

posted by Martin on 7/1/2018

<HW>

These are the examples of E28 Conceptual Object with my explanations:

§ Beethoven’s “Ode an die Freude” (Ode to Joy) (E73)

§ the definition of “ontology” in the Oxford English Dictionary (E73)

§ the knowledge about the victory at Marathon carried by the famous runner (E89)

explanation: In the following examples we illustrate the distinction between a propositional object, its names and its encoded forms. The Maxwell equations are a good example, because they belong to the fundamental laws of physics and their mathematical content yields identical, unambiguous results regardless formulation and encoding.

§ ‘Maxwell equations’ [preferred subject access point from LCSH, (E41)

http://lccn.loc.gov/sh85082387, as of 19 November 2012]

explanation: This is only the name for the Maxwell equations as standardized by the Library of Congress

§ ‘Equations, Maxwell’ [variant subject access point, from the same source] (E41)

explanation: This is another name for the equation standardized by the Library of Congress

§ Maxwell's equations (E89)

explanation: This is the semantic content of the equations i.e. the equations proper, regardless notation.

§ The encoding of Maxwells equations as in

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c4/Maxwell'sEquations.svg/500px-Maxwell'sEquations.svg.png (E73)

explanation: This one possible encoded form of the content of the equations i.e. symbolic and propositional.

The 40th joined meeting of the CIDOC CRM SIG and ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9 and the 33nd FRBR - CIDOC CRM Harmonization meeting, The sig accepted the explanations and examples provided by MD. They should be added to the standard with explanations in line as is, in order to support understanding of reader/user

The issue is closed