In the 54th CIDOC CRM & 47th FRBR/LRMoo SIG Meeting, upon discussing the redefinition of P161 has spatial projection, Anais Guillem provided some new examples for the property. They all come from Notre-Dame reconstruction draft mapping, that she is currently working on.
Background for the examples:
The case study is the collapsed transverse arch of the N-D nave. The voussoirs collapsed and their trajectories were documented (ie. spatio-temporal annotation and identification of individual voussoirs in the remains) during the cleaning activities through photogrammetric scenes.
The examples-set can be found below:
- E22 [voussoir] - P196 defines - E92 Space Time Volume [trajectory of a voussoir];
- E92 Space Time Volume [trajectory of a voussoir] - P10 falls within - E92 Space Time Volume [transverse arch];
- E92 [trajectory of a voussoir] - P161 has spatial projection - E53 Place [location of fallen voussoir];
- E53 Place [center of gravity] - P89 falls within - E53 Place [location of fallen voussoir];
- E53 [center of gravity]- P172 - geo:wktLiteral
- This property allows linking the data about the spatio-temporal annotation of voussoirs space time volumes and inferring a reconstruction hypothesis in regards to the fall location, inferred from the voussoirs’ tracking (appearance, disappearance, and extraction from the rubbles).
Decision: MD, CEO, AG to go through the examples and propose to incorporate them in the definition of P161 by the next SIG meeting.
HW: MD, CEO, AG
email by Martin Doerr, shared with Anais GUillem & Christian-Emil Ore (personal communication -- November 2022)
Dear Anais, Christian-Emil,
I had now time to review this very! interesting example:
"Example from the Notre-Dame reconstruction data mapping: the case study is the collapsed transverse arch of the N-D nave. The voussoirs collapsed and their trajectories were documented (ie. spatio-temporal annotation and identification of individual voussoirs in the remains) during the cleaning activities through photogrammetric scenes:
E22 [voussoir] - P196 defines - E92 Space Time Volume [trajectory of a voussoir];
E92 Space Time Volume [trajectory of a voussoir] - P10 falls within - E92 Space Time Volume [transverse arch];
E92 [trajectory of a voussoir] - P161 has spatial projection - E53 Place [location of fallen voussoir];
E53 Place [center of gravity] - P89 falls within - E53 Place [location of fallen voussoir];
E53 [center of gravity]- P172 - geo:wktLiteral
This property allows linking the data about the spatio-temporal annotation of voussoirs space time volumes and inferring a reconstruction hypothesis in regards to the fall location, inferred from the voussoirs’ tracking (appearance, disappearance, and extraction from the rubbles)."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to now, I have the impression that P161 may be used here in a different sense than defined:
P161 is a 3-Volume, a projection from Spacetime to 3D Space, not a projection from 3D Space to 2D Space.
I see the following, using the Presence, i.e. temporal sections of the overall Spacetime Volume of one voussoir.
The Presence A of the voussoir after its installation time and before the fire is within the place of transvers arch.
The P161 projection of the Presence B defined as from before the fire until after the collapse forms a vertical column-like 3D Volume, i.e. the path of its falling.
The Presence C of the voussoir after the collapse is on the floor.
The P161 projections of the Presence A and C are identical with the space occupied by the voussoir at that time, because it is at rest.
The P161 projection of the Presence A and C falls within that of Presence B.
The photogrammetry captures the P161 projection of the Presence C, because at rest.
The intersection of the vertical line from the centre of gravity of the P161 projection of the Presence C with the place of the arch before collapse must overlap with the P161 projection of the Presence A to be reconstructed.
To insert the example in the text, we would need a reference and an informal identifier. Otherwise, it could go to additional documentation, with some associated graphics.
please comment,
Best,
Martin
email by Anais Guillem, shared with Martin Doerr & Christian-Emil Ore (personal communication -- November 2022)
Dear Martin and Chritian-Emil,
I agree with you, i have changed the mapping since last time in that direction, ie using presence classes. I will illustrate with a diagram for the discussion. About the reference, this specific work is currently under review with Scientific Reports of Nature and a more complete documentation is put together on github. I send an email when I have updated the example.
HW by Anais Guillem shared with Martin Doerr and Christian-Emil Ore (personal communication --December 2022)
Hi all,
I share with you a googlefolder for the Issue 608:
https://drive.google.com/
there is a short ppt with some illustrations of the case study, a diagram and a doc where we can exchange
Let me know if you want to talk about it before next week
Best,
In the 55th joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM and SO/TC46/SC4/WG9; 48th FRBR/LRMoo SIG meeting, AG presented a use case intended to be formulated into an examples set for E92, E93 and P161. The use case comes from the Notree Dame de Paris restauration project, in which she is involved.
The examples are about the trajectory of the collapsed arch at Notre Dame.
Link to presentation here, modelling constructs used here.
How to proceed
HW: MD, AG, CEO to work more on the example. Could aim towards a publication with this example. Could then reference to it in the examples for E92, E93, P161.
Belval, December 2022