Post by Jutta Lindenthal (13 November 2024)
Dear All
In the context of the subject “About the relationship between symmetry and transitivity”, I noticed a few issues concerning P127 and P150, in particular, lost links and possible inconsistencies with ISO 25964-1:2011.
In case this is considered relevant, please find some notes and suggestions
in a downloadable PDF file:
https://nc.balilabs.de/index.php/s/ZyHJdDZHXmPJbqZ
Best,
Jutta
Post by Martin Doerr (13 November 2024)
Dear Jutta, All
Of course this is relevant, thank you very much!
Please send me a link to the text in an editable format. Transitivity between universals is a tricky thing, often deceiving intuition.
Anybody interested in participating in this discussion?
As a quick remark, I would not change "This property associates", because it is a stereotype we prefer throughout the document.
All the best,
Martin
Post by Jutta Lindenthal (14 November 2024)
Dear Martin, All
Many thanks for the response!
- Transitivity between universals is a tricky thing, often deceiving intuition.
Yes, it is. All the more so because the existing vocabularies rarely fulfill the conditions for logical, transitive relations.
Please find a docx file here https://nc.balilabs.de/index.php/s/GoBwYrNnapHRjLn
and a Google Doc https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bduGhrf3_6eW7kVBNnmyBUQCgxcj4GODGVK…
- As a quick remark, I would not change "This property associates", because it is a stereotype we prefer throughout the document.
Yes, I see. I removed the suggestion in the document.
All the best,
Jutta
In the 61st joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM and ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9 & 54th FRBR/LRMoo SIG, the group decided tochange the status from "Propoosed" to “Open” and assigned WS to report back to the SIG what the course of action concerning P127 and P150 should be.
HW: WS to make a proposal at the next SIG meeting.
Heraklion, October 2025