Issue 633: Inheritance of strong and weak shortcuts
In the 55th joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM and SO/TC46/SC4/WG9; 48th FRBR/LRMoo SIG meeting, the SIG resolved to start an issue where to discus the inheritance in strong/weak shortcuts.
P32 used general technique IsA P125, which itself stands as a shortcut for E7. P16: E70. P2: E55. There is no registered instance of a technique over which this is shortcutting. Is the subproperty still valid if there is no instance of technique?
HW: For MD, WS, CEO and TV to fully flesh out.
Belval, December 2022
Post by Christian-Emil Ore
This is interesting.
is declared to be a subproperty of
The object in the label is somewhat misleading.
"This property is a strong shortcut of the more fully developed path from E7 Activity through P16 used specific object, E70 Thing, P2 has type, to E55 Type"
So the object can be anything enduring of cause also a symbolic object which make sense for P32. So for P32 on may consider to replace P16 with a subproperty, say
Does this give meaning? Opinions?
Post by Martin Doerr
Indeed, I think this needs discussion. I'd rather think P125 is not superproperty, but P32 is subproperty of P2 has type.
Producing, e.g., a Benin bronze object with lost vax technique, or a traditional Greek window grid by forging and piercing iron rods, has no
specific intermediate. Isn't it?