Issue 494: Scope note guidelines

ID: 
494
Starting Date: 
2020-05-12
Working Group: 
4
Status: 
Open
Background: 

The ad-hoc CRM SIG Editorial Team of version 7.0, working on issue  Issue 483: 7.0 preparation - CRMbase review for inconsistencies, asked Martin to formulate some guidelines for scope note writting

April 2020

Current Proposal: 

sent  by Martin to editorial team of CIDOC CRM version 7.0 on 12/5/2020

Dear Steve,

Attached my first draft for scope note writing. I have not touched yet the scope notes for properties. There is much less theory about it. Substance and Identity is discussed by David Wiggins in an excellent book. Unity criteria and identity criteria by Nicola Guarino in several papers. There are the old AAT guidelines for scope note writing, which I used from memory. We could try to find them. Existence criteria are rather things I have discussed with Maria Daskalaki. I think the idea is implicit in Wiggin's book.

I'd suggest Steve to rework if adequate, and all of you to comment.

I'll continue with property scope notes.
 

sent by Martin to editorial team of CIDOC CRM version 7.0 on 20/5/2020

Dear All,

While I am waiting for Steve's comments about the first part of my guidelines, I attach now the draft completed with property scope notes and an Appendix of annotated examples. I have used this to infer the property scope note rules, in lack of more theory. When I tried to add a list of good practice class scope notes, I found them much less disciplined than our property scope notes. This is not a call for massive rewriting, but we may consider some systematic improvements in the future.

At this stage, I am waiting for your feedback before continuing.

Posted by Martin on 15/10/2020

Attached our first trial to provide guidelines for scope note writing. Implicitly, this constitutes a theory what the "intension" of a class is about.

For classes, we base this on related work by Nicola Guarino on identity and unity, and on David Wiggins about absolute identity, and on our own observations in CRM-SIG about the relevance of existence and potential.

For properties, this appears to be new land.

The attached guidelines are also a result of analyzing much debated scope notes in the CRM. However, most scope notes in the CRM text are less analytical and stand improvement. This does not necessarily mean to become more verbose. Multiple aspects proposed in these guidelines may be implicit or obvious in a simple phrase.

Please comment

Post by Martin Doerr (16 June 2021)

Dear All,

This issue has long been discussed internally. Scope note writing is important for all working on extensions of the CRM, locally or those submitted for approval by CRM-SIG.

The meaning to be expressed by scope notes is a distinct center piece of the specific methodology CIDOC CRM SIG applies, and complements rules in formal logic. It basically connects the world the user has in mind with the formal concepts of the model.

Therefore, we would like to present this draft text in the next SIG meeting and invite for a wider review. Since we will not have time to read through the whole text in the meeting, please read this text carefully before the meeting.

All the best,

Martin

In the 50th joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM SIG and SO/TC46/SC4/WG9; 43nd FRBR – CIDOC CRM Harmonization meeting, MD presented his HW (document on how to read scope-notes). 
SIG members thought the text very clear and helpful. It was marked that it is one of the documents that need to be translated in other languages, to help the work of various translation initiatives. 
HW: EC, MR, NG, PR read the text closely and provide feedback

Meetings discussed: