Issue 384: Template for family models
In the 41st joined meeting of the CIDOC CRM SIG and ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9 and the 34th FRBR - CIDOC CRM Harmonization meeting, the sig, resolving the issue 358, decided to open new issue for the discussion about doc template for family models. Thus this issue is initiated by Thanasis Velios post on 9/5/2018 about the sub-issue of 358 about simplifying the template for the description of the family models. Thanasis proposed that the the current template is actually simple and, in his view, suitable but it has not always been followed. . As far as the document template is concerned he proposed that it should remain the same. Only that it should be followed more strictly (for example, for the CRMsci version 1.2.5 he have proposed the removal of several sections which are not part of the template - see issue 332).
The sig reviewed the template commented by Thanasis and decided that we should got rid of a bunch of fore matter that was repetitive. The idea would be to create just a reference to the CRMbase document and its formulation of all the basic principles etc. HW assigned to Thanasis to write the reference phrase.
Lyon, May 2018
Posted by Thanasis on 11/11/2018
I had a go at an introductory sentence for the model extensions:
This document describes work which uses and extends the CIDOC Conceptual
Reference Model (CRM, ISO21127). The Definition of the CIDOC-CRM
document should be read before this document. References to the CRM in
this document are taken from CRM version 6.2 maintained by CIDOC.
In the 43rd joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM SIG and ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9; 36th FRBR - CIDOC CRM Harmonization meeting;The sig reviewed the introductory sentence for the model extensions provided by TV and accepted it with minor modifications. It now reads:
"This document describes work which uses and extends the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM, ISO21127). The CIDOC-CRM definition document should be read before this document. References to the CRM in this document are taken from CRM version XX maintained by CIDOC."
Lastly the sig decided that the CIDOC CRM referenced classes and properties by CRM family model should not being copied in the definition file of the family model.
The approved template for the definition of a CRM family model may be found here
Heraklion, March 2019
sent it by Thanasis Velios to editorial team of CIDOC CRM version 7.0 on 9/6/2020
Following our last discussion I have included two tables in the family model template document with a list of external classes and a list of external properties.
The homework is on Google Drive in the homework folder:
This continues issue 384, so once we approve, I can post to the list if necessary.
sent it by Christian Emil to to editorial team of CIDOC CRM version 7.0 on 9/6/2020
The front page is taken from CRMarcheo, and should be replaced with something more accurate - I think.
[CRM SIG] 384 evote.
Thanasis Velios via CRM-sig, Friday 18th June 2021
This issue is about agreeing a template based on which the specification documents of CRM family models will be produced. The working document for this issue is here:
The proposed template is here:
The vote is to decide on whether to adopt the template document. The main change from the existing template is the inclusion of a table for class and property dependencies to allow clear references to other models without repeating material and while keeping track of different versions.
The possible votes are:
Yes = accept/agree
No = do not accept/agree
Other = With other you can either introduce a caveat (e.g.: 'Yes, but there is a typo on word x, fix it.') or you can write VETO, if you wish to stop the proposal, in which case you should also write a justification and reformulate the issue (e.g.: 'VETO, this change is unacceptable because it violates the following principle...')
Please send your e-votes by the 28th of June.
All the best,
Post by Robert Sanderson (18 June 2021)
Happy (after the SIG, due to timing) test this out in practice by trying to write up the Linked Art ontology extensions using it.
Post by Martin Doerr (19 June 2021)
Post by Donatella Fiorani (21 June 2021)
Post by Oyvind Eide (21 June 2021)
Post by George Bruseker (21 June 2021)
Post by Gerald Hiebel (21 June 2021)
Post by Christian-Emil (21 June 2021)
Post by Francesco Beretta (21 June 2021)
Post by Pat Riva (22 June 2021)
Have not yet applied it to LRMoo, but it should work.
I have a question about the list of external properties: in FRBRoo this list included the domains and ranges in the table. I have found that helpful. Is the format of the table perscriptive?