Posted by Vladimir Alexiev on 20/9/2012
P88i_forms_part_of should be subproperty of P89_falls_within: place X cannot be part of place Y, without X also falling withing Y.
>From the scope notes of the two properties:
P89: addresses spatial containment only, and no 'whole-part' relationship between the two places is implied
P88: implies both spatial and contextual containment relationships between the two Places
If P88 means two things and P89 means one of them, then P88 must imply P89.
FORTH TR-429 (Apr 2012) "Fundamental Categories and Relationships for intuitive querying CIDOC-CRM based repositories" http://old.cidoc-crm.org/docs/TechnicalReport429_April2012.pdf says on p14 "P89F.falls_within is a super‐property of P88B.forms_part_of. P88 also defines contextual containment relationship between the Places. Here the more general relationship P89 is enough so we use this one in the path."
In accordance with this spec, I have implemented FRs about places (e.g. rso:FR7_from_place) using P89.
However, such subproperty statement is missing from CRM 5.0.4, cidoc_crm_v5.0.4_english_label.rdfs, and ecrm_current.owl.
P88 deleted.
Check CRM for inverse superproperty relationships. (c.e.s, martin)
Amersfoort 20/11/2012
Steve Stead will be do it.
CRM-SIG meeting. Stockholm 7/6/2013
CEO will do it
30th CRM-SIG meeting Hague, April 2014
In 31st joined meeting of the CIDOC CRM SIG, ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9 and the 24th FRBR - CIDOC CRM, resolving the issue 219, we changed the subproperty of P130 to the inverse and we added to the terminology a sentence about superproperty of inverse. The issue is closed
Heraklion, Crete October 2014