update the list of property quantifiers

In the 56th joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM and ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9 &49th FRBR/LRMoo SIG, the SIG approved the proposal by WS to introduce the missing quantification definitions that are mentioned in the specification document. 

Arguments were made against deprecating property quantifications explanations that do not occur in the specification document.

• The addition of new properties might result in reintroducing explanations of said property quantifications.
• They also happen to appear in extensions –f.i. LRMoo uses (1,1:1,n)

The new property quantifications should make it in the community version (i.e. 7.2.3). Whether they also make it to the ISO version is up to PM & EC to decide. 

• Also, based on the decision for issue 583 to introduce Sxx2 Relative Dimension and corresponding property Oxx6 is relative to (has relative dimension) in CRMsci v2.1, the SIG appointed MD & CEO to properly define the property quantifier used for Oxx6 is relative to in CRMsci and CRMbase -"many to many, necessary, two (2,n:0,n)”.  

Crete, May 2023

In the 58th CIDOC CRM & 51st FRBR/LRMoo SIG Meeting, CEO gave an update on the issue: namely that the list of quantifiers and their readings has been properly defined in the introduction of the CRM. What remained to be done was to provide declarations for properties that require (at least) two instances of the domain/range classes (like O33 is relative to). After some thought, it was decided that this is a bit excessive (it could very well be that a property may require a different cardinality, let’s say “3,n:x,x”), and it would be counterintuitive to add as many property quantifier declarations, as there are restrictions. 
Proposal: CEO is to draft a generic statement that extends existing declarations based on requirements concerning the cardinality of domain/range instances of the properties, and submit it for an evote. The SIG agreed to that. Concerning the ER vs UML property quantification and what is the best/easiest way to represent property quantifiers, if people wish to change them, they should raise an issue about it where to discuss it.
Decision: proceed as suggested.

Paris, March 2024
 

Post by Christian-Emil Ore (3 October 2025 -p.c.)

Dear all,
I have revisited the commented text
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aA1nI31krf61p4FlDNzmkgfOnfdW6uURMXf1NHD32k4/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.ifkx5zszwkvt 
under the issue https://cidoc-crm.org/Issue/ID-636-update-the-list-of-property-quantifiers 
and done a new check against the standards.

Some new quantifications have been added. I also drafted a new paragraph in the introduction to the quantifications. The changes are marked with yellow in the attached document.

The extra columns and the borders  should of course be deleted. The first column is the numbers used in the document mentioned and the last column is the result of searching for the quantifications. In general I first checked CRMbase, CRMsci, LRMoo and then the others if I did not find a large number in these three
 

Best,
Christian-Emil

In the 61st joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM and ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9 & 54th FRBR/LRMoo SIG, CEO presented his HW for issue 636:  

1. a statement extending property quantifiers that come with very specific cardinality constraints (like “two or more instances of a particular class” etc.).
2. addition of property quantifier definitions that appear in CIDOC CRM Harmonized Ontologies in the property quantifier declarations set (Introduction section, appropriate chapter).

For the details of the proposals by CEO and an overview of the decisions, see here.

Decisions: The SIG approved the proposals and assigned the following pieces of HW: 

• HW: GB to help redraft the statement and add a clause about the property range.
• HW: WS & CEO to go through the labels for the property quantifiers.

Following the necessary editing, they will appear in the introduction section of CIDOC CRM (V7.3.2) –under Property Quantifiers.

Heraklion, October 2025