This class comprises all things in the universe of discourse of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model. It is an abstract concept providing for three general properties:Identification by name or appellation, and in particular by a preferred identifierClassification by type, allowing further refinement of the specific subclass an instance belongs to Attachment of free text and other unstructured data for the expression of anything not captured by formal propertiesAll other classes within the CIDOC CRM are directly or indirectly specialisations of E1 CRM Entity.
This class comprises all phenomena, such as the instances of E4 Periods and E5 Events, which happen over a limited extent in time. This extent in time must be contiguous, i.e., without gaps. In case the defining kinds of phenomena for an instance of E2 Temporal Entity cease to happen, and occur later again at another time, we regard that the former instance of E2 Temporal Entity has ended and a new instance has come into existence. In more intuitive terms, the same event cannot happen twice.In some contexts, such phenomena are also called perdurants. This class is disjoint from E77 Persistent Item and is an abstract class that typically has no direct instances. E2 Temporal Entity is specialized into E4 Period, which applies to a particular geographic area (defined with a greater or lesser degree of precision), and E3 Condition State, which applies to instances of E18 Physical Thing.
This class comprises sets of coherent phenomena or cultural manifestations occurring in time and space.It is the social or physical coherence of these phenomena that identify an instance of E4 Period and not the associated spatiotemporal extent. This extent is only the “ground” or space in an abstract physical sense that the actual process of growth, spread and retreat has covered. Consequently, different periods can overlap and coexist in time and space, such as when a nomadic culture exists in the same area and time as a sedentary culture. This also means that overlapping land use rights, common among first nations, amounts to overlapping periods.Often, this class is used to describe prehistoric or historic periods such as the “Neolithic Period”, the “Ming Dynasty” or the “McCarthy Era”, but also geopolitical units and activities of settlements are regarded as special cases of E4 Period. However, there are no assumptions about the scale of the associated phenomena. In particular all events are seen as synthetic processes consisting of coherent phenomena. Therefore, E4 Period is a superclass of E5 Event. For example, a modern clinical birth, an instance of E67 Birth, can be seen as both a single event, i.e., an instance of E5 Event, and as an extended period, i.e., an instance of E4 Period, that consists of multiple physical processes and complementary activities performed by multiple instances of E39 Actor.As the actual extent of an instance of E4 Period in spacetime we regard the trajectories of the participating physical things during their participation in an instance of E4 Period. This includes the open spaces via which these things have interacted and the spaces by which they had the potential to interact during that period or event in the way defined by the type of the respective period or event. Examples include the air in a meeting room transferring the voices of the participants. Since these phenomena are fuzzy, we assume the spatiotemporal extent to be contiguous, except for cases of phenomena spreading out over islands or other separated areas, including geopolitical units distributed over disconnected areas such as islands or colonies.Whether the trajectories necessary for participants to travel between these areas are regarded as part of the spatiotemporal extent or not has to be decided in each case based on a concrete analysis, taking use of the sea for other purposes than travel, such as fishing, into consideration. One may also argue that the activities to govern disconnected areas imply travelling through spaces connecting them and that these areas hence are spatially connected in a way, but it appears counterintuitive to consider for instance travel routes in international waters as extensions of geopolitical units.Consequently, an instance of E4 Period may occupy a number of disjoint spacetime volumes, however there must not be a discontinuity in the time-span covered by these spacetime volumes. This means that an instance of E4 Period must be contiguous in time. If it has ended in all areas, it has ended as a whole. However, it may end in one area before another, such as in the Polynesian migration, and it continues as long as it is ongoing in at least one area.We model E4 Period as a subclass of E2 Temporal Entity and of E92 Spacetime Volume. The latter is intended as a phenomenal spacetime volume as defined in CIDOC CRMgeo (Doerr Hiebel, 2013). By virtue of this multiple inheritance, we can discuss the physical extent of an instance of E4 Period without representing each instance of it together with an instance of its associated spacetime volume. This model combines two quite different kinds of substance: an instance of E4 Period is a phenomenon while an instance of E92 Spacetime Volume is an aggregation of points in spacetime. However, the real spatiotemporal extent of an instance of E4 Period is regarded to be unique to it due to all its details and fuzziness; its identity and existence depends uniquely on the identity of the instance of E4 Period. Therefore, this multiple inheritance is unambiguous and effective and furthermore corresponds to the intuitions of natural language.Typical use of this class in cultural heritage documentation is for documenting cultural and artistic periods. There are two different conceptualisations of ‘artistic style’, defined either by physical features or by historical context. For example, “Impressionism” can be viewed as a period in the European sphere of influence lasting from approximately 1870 to 1905 during which paintings with particular characteristics were produced by a group of artists that included (among others) Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley and Degas. Alternatively, it can be regarded as a style applicable to all paintings sharing the characteristics of the works produced by the Impressionist painters, regardless of historical context. The first interpretation is an instance of E4 Period, and the second defines morphological object types that fall under E55 Type.A geopolitical unit as a specific case of an instance of E4 Period is the set of activities and phenomena related to the claim of power, the consequences of belonging to a jurisdictional area and an administrative system that establishes a geopolitical unit. Examples from the modern period are countries or administrative areas of countries such as districts whose actions and structures define activities and phenomena in the area that they intend to govern. The borders of geopolitical units are often defined in contracts or treaties although they may deviate from the actual practice. The spatiotemporal properties of Geopolitical units can be modelled through the properties inherited from E92 Spacetime Volume.Another specific case of an instance of E4 Period is the actual extent of the set of activities and phenomena as evidenced by their physical traces that define a settlement, such as the populated period of Nineveh.
This class comprises distinct, delimited and coherent processes and interactions of a material nature, in cultural, social or physical systems, involving and affecting instances of E77 Persistent Item in a way characteristic of the kind of process. Typical examples are meetings, births, deaths, actions of decision taking, making or inventing things, but also more complex and extended ones such as conferences, elections, building of a castle, or battles.While the continuous growth of a tree lacks the limits characteristic of an event, its germination from a seed does qualify as an event. Similarly, the blowing of the wind lacks the distinctness and limits of an event, but a hurricane, flood or earthquake would qualify as an event. Mental processes are considered as events, in cases where they are connected with the material externalization of their results; for example, the creation of a poem, a performance or a change of intention that becomes obvious from subsequent actions or declarations.The effects of an instance of E5 Event may not lead to relevant permanent changes of properties or relations of the items involved in it, for example an unrecorded performance. Of course, in order to be documented, some kind of evidence for an event must exist, be it witnesses, traces or products of the event.While instances of E4 Period always require some form of coherence between its constituent phenomena, in addition, the essential constituents of instances of E5 Event should contribute to an overall effect; for example, the statements made during a meeting and the listening of the audience.Viewed at a coarse level of detail, an instance of E5 Event may appear as if it had an ‘instantaneous’ overall effect, but any process or interaction of material nature in reality have an extent in time and space. At a fine level, instances of E5 Event may be analysed into component phenomena and phases within a space and timeframe, and as such can be seen as a period, regardless of the size of the phenomena. The reverse is not necessarily the case: not all instances of E4 Period give rise to a noteworthy overall effect and are thus not instances of E5 Event.
This class comprises actions intentionally carried out by instances of E39 Actor that result in changes of state in the cultural, social, or physical systems documented. This notion includes complex, composite and long-lasting actions such as the building of a settlement or a war, as well as simple, short-lived actions such as the opening of a door.
This class comprises non-material products of our minds and other human produced data that have become objects of a discourse about their identity, circumstances of creation or historical implication. The production of such information may have been supported by the use of technical devices such as cameras or computers.Characteristically, instances of this class are created, invented or thought by someone, and then may be documented or communicated between persons. Instances of E28 Conceptual Object have the ability to exist on more than one particular carrier at the same time, such as paper, electronic signals, marks, audio media, paintings, photos, human memories, etc.They cannot be destroyed. They exist as long as they can be found on at least one carrier or in at least one human memory. Their existence ends when the last carrier and the last memory are lost.
This general class comprises discrete, identifiable, instances of E77 Persistent Item that are documented as single units, that either consist of matter or depend on being carried by matter and are characterized by relative stability. They may be intellectual products or physical things. They may for instance have a solid physical form, an electronic encoding, or they may be a logical concept or structure.
This class comprises discrete, identifiable human-made items that are documented as single units. These items are either intellectual products or human-made physical things, and are characterized by relative stability. They may for instance have a solid physical form, an electronic encoding, or they may be logical concepts or structures.
This class comprises those material or immaterial items to which instances of E30 Right, such as the right of ownership or use, can be applied. This is true for all instances of E18 Physical Thing. In the case of instances of E28 Conceptual Object, however, the identity of an instance of E28 Conceptual Object or the method of its use may be too ambiguous to reliably establish instances of E30 Right, as in the case of taxa and inspirations. Ownership of corporations is currently regarded as out of scope of the CIDOC CRM.
This class comprises identifiable immaterial items, such as poems, jokes, data sets, images, texts, multimedia objects, procedural prescriptions, computer program code, algorithm or mathematical formulae, that have an objectively recognizable structure and are documented as single units. The encoding structure known as a "named graph" also falls under this class, so that each "named graph" is an instance of E73 Information Object.An instance of E73 Information Object does not depend on a specific physical carrier, which can include human memory, and it can exist on one or more carriers simultaneously.Instances of E73 Information Object of a linguistic nature should be declared as instances of the E33 Linguistic Object subclass. Instances of E73 Information Object of a documentary nature should be declared as instances of the E31 Document subclass. Conceptual items such as types and classes are not instances of E73 Information Object, nor are ideas without a reproducible expression.
This class comprises items that have persistent characteristics of structural nature substantially related to their identity and their integrity, sometimes known as “endurants” in philosophy. Persistent Items may be physical entities, such as people, animals or things, conceptual entities such as ideas, concepts, products of the imagination or even names. Instances of E77 Persistent Item may be present or be part of interactions in different periods or events. They can repeatedly be recognized at disparate occasions during their existence by characteristics of structural nature. The respective characteristics need not be exactly the same during all the existence of an instance of E77 Persistent Item. Often, they undergo gradual change, still bearing some similarities with that of previous times, or disappear completely and new emerge. For instance, a person, from the time of being born on, will gradually change all its features and acquire new ones, such as a scar. Even the DNA in different body cells will develop defects and mutations. Nevertheless, relevant characteristics used should be sufficiently similar to recognize the instance for some substantial period of time. The more specific criteria that determine the identity of instances of subclasses of E77 Persistent Item may vary considerably and are described or referred to in the respective scope notes. The decision about which exact criteria to use depends on whether the observable behaviour of the respective part of reality such confined conforms to the reasoning the user is interested in. For example, a building can be regarded as no longer existing if it is dismantled and the materials reused in a different configuration. On the other hand, human beings go through radical and profound changes during their life-span, affecting both material composition and form, yet preserve their identity by other criteria, such as being bodily separated from other persons. Similarly, inanimate objects may be subject to exchange of parts and matter. On the opposite, the identity of a (version of a) text of a scientific publication is given by the exact arrangement of its relevant symbols. The main classes of objects that fall outside the scope of the E77 Persistent Item class are temporal objects such as periods, events and acts, and descriptive properties. An instance of E77 Persistent Item does not require actual knowledge of the identifying features of the instance being currently known. There may be cases, where the actual identifying features of an instance of E77 Persistent Item are not decidable at a particular state of knowledge.
This class comprises immaterial items, including but not limited to stories, plots, procedural prescriptions, algorithms, laws of physics or images that are, or represent in some sense, sets of propositions about real or imaginary things and that are documented as single units or serve as topic of discourse. This class also comprises items that are “about” something in the sense of a subject. In the wider sense, this class includes expressions of psychological value such as non-figural art and musical themes. However, conceptual items such as types and classes are not instances of E89 Propositional Object. This should not be confused with the definition of a type, which is indeed an instance of E89 Propositional Object.
This class comprises identifiable symbols and any aggregation of symbols, such as characters, identifiers, traffic signs, emblems, texts, data sets, images, musical scores, multimedia objects, computer program code or mathematical formulae that have an objectively recognizable structure and that are documented as single units.It includes sets of signs of any nature, which may serve to designate something, or to communicate some propositional content. An instance of E90 Symbolic Object may or may not have a specific meaning, for example an arbitrary character string.In some cases, the content of an instance of E90 Symbolic Object may completely be represented by a serialized digital content model, such as a sequence of ASCII-encoded characters, an XML or HTML document, or a TIFF image. The property P3 has note and its subproperty P190 has symbolic content allow for the description of this content model. In order to disambiguate which symbolic level is the carrier of the meaning, the property P3.1 has type can be used to specify the encoding (e.g., "bit", "Latin character", RGB pixel).
This class comprises 4-dimensional point sets (volumes) in physical spacetime (in contrast to mathematical models of it) regardless their true geometric forms. They may derive their identity from being the extent of a material phenomenon or from being the interpretation of an expression defining an extent in spacetime. Intersections of instances of E92 Spacetime Volume, E53 Place and E52 Time-Span are also regarded as instances of E92 Spacetime Volume. An instance of E92 Spacetime Volume is either contiguous or composed of a finite number of contiguous subsets. Its boundaries may be fuzzy due to the properties of the phenomena it derives from or due to the limited precision up to which defining expression can be identified with a real extent in spacetime. The duration of existence of an instance of E92 Spacetime Volume is its projection on time.
This class comprises the activity of making honest inferences or observations. An honest inference or observation is one in which the E39 Actor carrying out the I1 Argumentation justifies and believes that the I6 Belief Value associated with the resulting I2 Belief about the I4 Proposition Set is the correct value at the time that the activity was undertaken and that any I3 Inference Logic or methodology was correctly applied. One instance of E39 Actor may carry out an instance of I1 Argumentation, though the E39 Actor may, of course, be an instance of E74 Group.
This class comprises the notion that the associated I4 Proposition Set is held to have a particular I6 Belief Value by a particular E39 Actor. This can be understood as the period of time that an individual group holds a particular set of propositions to be true, false, or somewhere in between.
This class comprises the rules used as inputs to I5 Inference Making. In this context, the term “logic” is used in the most general sense of the Greek term, and not in the mathematical sense only. Examples are the direct application of formal logic, mathematical theories and calculus, formal or informal default reasoning based on default values associated with categories, probabilistic reasoning-based mathematical models and assumed or observed frequencies for certain categories, application of theoretical social models and comparisons with “cultural parallels”, etc. An instance of Inference Logic could also be a reference to the exact software release of a Bayesian reasoner, a rule such as “later layers are on top of earlier layers”, or even a term like “social intuition”, if this is scholarly acceptable (after Doerr, Kritsotaki and Boutsika, 2011). Indeed, anything that is scientifically or academically acceptable as a method for drawing conclusions may be included, for instance, human pattern recognition. A particular instance of I3 Inference Logic would be the algorithm implemented in a particular revision of a software package. Instances of I3 Inference Logic not only comprise the method of reasoning, but also the set of categorical laws or axioms used in the argumentation. Often, both are inextricably interwoven, for instance in a software implementation.
This class comprises the sets of formal, binary propositions that an I2 Belief is held about. It could be implemented as a named graph, a spreadsheet, or any other structured dataset. Regardless of the specific syntax employed, the effective propositions it contains should be made up of unambiguous identifiers, concepts of a formal ontology, and constructs of logic.
This class comprises the action of making honest propositions and statements about particular states of affairs in reality or possible realities, or categorical descriptions of reality by using inferences from other statements based on hypotheses and any form of formal or informal logic. It includes evaluations, calculations, and interpretations, based on mathematical formulations and propositions. It is characterized by the use of an existing I2 Belief as the premise that, taken together with a set of I3 Inference Logic, draws a further I2 Belief as a conclusion. Documenting instances of I5 Inference making primarily enables tracing the dependency of knowledge from conclusion to premise through subsequent inferences possibly back to primary evidence, so that the range of influence of knowledge revision at any intermediate stage of complex inference chains on current convictions can be narrowed down by query. The explicit reference to the applied inference logic further allows scholars and scientists to assess if they can or would follow the documented argument. The class is not intended to promote the use of computationally decidable systems of logic as replacements of scholarly justifications of arguments, even though it allows for documenting the use of decidable logic, if that was deemed adequate for the problem at hand. Principles of scholarly justifications of arguments are also regarded as kinds of inference logic.
This class comprises any encoding of the value of the truth of an I2 Belief. It may be expressed in terms of discrete logic, modal logic, probability, fuzziness, or any other adequaterepresentational system. A minimum requirement of flexibility is for three values: True; False; Unknown.
This class comprises the action of an E39 Actor adopting propositions taken from an interpretation of the intended meaning of an instance of E73 Information Object as being true, or in some way likely to be true. The adopted propositions constitute the conclusion of the action in the form of a new instance of I12 Adopted belief of the actor adopting it. The basis of I7 Belief Adoption is the justification of trust in the source of the adopted propositions, rather than the application of rules for inferring the respective propositions from logical remises. Typical examples are the citation of academic papers or the reuse of datasets. Where an instance of I7 Belief Adoption is based on personal communication (marked as pers.comm. in the studied text), this should be represented by using P2 has type: “Pers.Comm.”, directly from the instance of I7 Belief Adoption.
This class comprises statements about the provenance of instances of E70 Thing existing at the time of making the provenance statements. An instance of I10 Provenance Statement must contain propositions about the presence of the respective instances of E70 Thing in an event or spatiotemporal context of reference. Characteristically, it may pertain to the writing by a known author at a known or unknown date or place, or to the existence of the text known to some public, regardless of the truth of authorship. In case that only information objects exist describing the proper thing of interest, such as a photo, or photo of a photo, of a lost archaeological object, an instance of I10 ProvenanceStatement should contain the relevant chain of intermediate events transferring the information from the proper thing of interest up to the extant information objects taken into account, or refer to it. The property J20 is about the provenance of can be used to link the instance of I10 Provenance Statement as a whole, with the proper thing of interest. It constitutes a constraint to the provenance statement that it must contain the description of the relevant context of reference, and, if applicable, to the relevant chain of intermediate events transferring the information.
This class comprises the persistence of particular value ranges of the properties of a particular thing or things, over a timespan. The identity of an instance of I11 Situation is given byprescribing kinds of properties and a particular timespan and optionally the spatial area. This prescription of properties enables the possibility of observing the values of those properties prescribed, that hold in the specified timespan and spatial area. In general, there are no natural boundaries to the combination of the kinds of properties or the space and the timespan under consideration upon defining a situation, other than the interest and ability of the observer to do so. Therefore, this class is purely epistemological in nature, describing arbitrary units of observation of the world.
This class comprises the notion that an instance of E39 Actor adopted the meaning of an associated instance of I4 Proposition Set by arguments of trust from a source created by another instance of E39 Actor, and holds it as being true or in some way likely to be true. This source can be documented via the property J14 adopted interpretation of (has adopted interpretation). The used interpretation of the meaning of the source may be a belief of the adopting Actor or another one and can be documented as an instance of I13 Intended Meaning Belief, if this detail is relevant.
This class comprises beliefs on the part of an instance of E39 Actor that a particular I4 Proposition Set formally represents (in part or in its entirety) the intended meaning that was created by another instance of E39 Actor, without considering an opinion yet about its truth or trustworthiness. The belief constitutes an interpretation of the source. The respective proposition set can be documented using the property J16 assumed meaning (is supposed meaning in), whereas the respective source can be documented via the property J17 about (has interpretation) and holds as being true or in some way likely to be true.
This class comprises beliefs of an Actor that a particular instance of E70 Thing, in general available to this Actor, is identical to one present in a relevant event or context of reference in the past, such as a text in a book being sufficiently identical to the one in the claimed author’s original manuscript or edition in order to be used by the Actor for citation. Other examples are the provenance of archaeological objects in collections, which may pertain to the claimed excavation spot or to the inferred context of their creation. The term “in general available” means that the thing is either physically in the hands of the actor or that the actor or an actor of their trust has the principled ability to get access to thething. In case that only information objects exist describing the proper thing of interest, such as a photo of a lost archaeological object, an instance of Ix5 Provenance Belief should be based on arguments including references to provenance beliefs about descriptions, representations and the described things. A formal description about the assumed provenance can be documented via the property Jxx8 that. Note that, depending on the intended argumentation about the respective instance of E70 Thing, different aspects of provenance may be described about the same instance of E70 Thing.
This class comprises activities of making arguments and concluding about the likely provenance of instances of E70 Thing existing at the time of this assessment. These activities may further be about the provenance of things referred to or represented by existing information objects, and subsequent references.
This class comprises processes of interpreting the intended meaning of parts or the whole of the content of an instance of E73 Information Object as propositions. Such interpretations may include the disambiguation of the meaning of words and expressions, expanding abbreviations, resolving named entities, references and co-references, and complementing missing text parts, without however arguing about the actual truth of the information. In principle, any use of an information object pertaining to its meaning implies an instance of Ix1 Meaning Comprehension. However, in practical applications, texts in natural language are often clear enough so that no explicit explanation of the interpretation is needed for the user. In such cases, there is no need to create explicit instances of Ix1 Meaning Comprehension, but the adopted belief may directly be linked via Jxx2 adopted interpretation of (has adopted interpretation), or the instance of Ix1 Meaning Comprehension may be made implicit to an instance of I7 Belief Adoption by multiple instantiation. Explicit documentation of instances of Ix1 Meaning Comprehension are useful, if the interpretations are not obvious and if competing arguments about them exist.
This class comprises the action of making categorical hypotheses based on inference rules and theories; By categorical hypotheses we mean assumptions about the kinds of interactions and related kinds of structures of a domain that have the character of “laws” of nature or human behavior, be it necessary or probabilistic. Categorical hypotheses are developed by “induction” from finite numbers of observation and the absence of observations of particular kinds. As such, categorical hypotheses are always subject to falsification by new evidence. Instances of S8 Categorical Hypothesis Building include making and questioning categorical hypotheses.
This class comprises instances of E5 Event or S10 Material Substantial (i.e. items or phenomena, such as physical things, their behaviour, states and interactions or events), that can be observed by measurement or detection devices or by human sensory impression including when enhanced by tools. In order to be observable, instances of E5 Event must consist of some interaction or action of material substance. In some cases, the spatiotemporal confinement of the event itself, such as a flash, a car stopping etc. marks the limits of a documented observation of an event. In other cases, such as the situation of a car passing by a certain object, the spatiotemporal limits of the event of observing itself, as well as the direction of attention or the orientation of used instruments, may constrain the observed detail of a larger process, e.g., noticing the sight of a car passing by; a light emission, etc. Conceptual objects manifest through their carriers such as books, digital media, or even human memory. Attributes of conceptual objects, such as number of words, can be observed on their carriers. If the respective properties between carriers differ, either they carry different instances of conceptual objects or the difference can be attributed to accidental deficiencies in one of the carriers. In that sense even immaterial objects are observable. By this model we address the fact that frequently, the actually observed carriers of conceptual objects are not explicitly identified in documentation, i.e., they are assumed to have existed but they are unknown as individuals.
This property associates an instance of I2 Belief with the instance of I5 Inference Making that used it as a premise.
This property associates an instance of I2 Belief with the instance of I1 Argumentation that concluded it.
This property associates an instance of I3 Inference Logic with the instance of I5 Inference Making that used it to draw its conclusion.
This property associates an instance of I4 Proposition Set with the instance of I2 Belief that holds an opinion about it.
This property associates an instance of I2 Belief with the I6 Belief Value that reflects the opinion of the instance of I2 Belief about the I4 Proposition Set associated with it.
This property associates an instance of I7 Belief Adoption with the instance of E73 Information Object hat a source of or evidence for the I4 Proposition Set that was adopted.
This property associates an instance of I7 Belief Adoption with the instance of I12 Adopted Belief that was established and possibly selected from the interpretation of the source or sources referred to by the property J14 adopted interpretation of. This property implies a relation of trust in the reliability of the sources. The actual believed content, i.e., propositions about some past reality that have been adopted from the source, should be documented using the property J4 that.
This property associates an instance of I12 Adopted Belief with a source or sources of interpretation from which the belief was established and possibly selected. In some cases of scholarly arguments, multiple source referring to a common topic may have been interpreted in order to form a particular belief about the topic referred to.
This property associates an instance of I7 Belief Adoption with an instance of I13 Intended meaning Belief about a meaning believed to be expressed in the source or sources referred to by the property J14 adopted interpretation of.
This property associates an instance of I13 Intended Meaning Belief with the instance of I4 Proposition Set that represents the meaning assumed by the holder of the belief to have been intended by the respective source. The latter source can be documented with the property J17 about (has interpretation).
This property associates an instance of I13 Intended Meaning Belief with the instance of E73 Information Object that was a source of or evidence for the interpretation of its intended meaning. If sources are fragmentary about or complementary to a specific topic, more than one source may have been used.
This property associates an instance of I7 Belief Adoption with an instance of I14 Provenance Belief about the source or sources referred to by the property J14 adopted interpretation of, which justifies the conviction that the trusted and adopted content of the source, or its copy at hand, is actually identical, or sufficiently close to the assumed original and its context of creation.
This property associates an instance of I14 Provenance Belief with the instance of I10 Provenance Statement that holds an opinion about it.
This property associates an instance of I10 Provenance Statement with an instance of E70 Thing, the provenance of which the statement describes.
This property describes the naming or identification of any real-world item by a name or any other identifier. This property associates an instance of I15 Provenance Assessment with an instance of I14 Provenance Belief that constitutes the conclusion of the assessment. An instance of I15 Provenance Assessment may conclude more than one instances of I14 Provenance Belief, typically about different objects considered in the same assessment.
This property associates an instance of I16 Meaning Comprehension with the instance of E73 Information Object that was the source of or evidence for the interpretation of its intended meaning. If sources are fragmentary about or complementary to a specific topic, more than one source may have been used.
This property associates an instance of I16 Meaning Comprehension with the instance of I13 Intended Meaning Belief that was the result of the interpretation of the intended meaning of the analysed source(s).
This property describes the use of material or immaterial things in a way essential to the performance or the outcome of an instance of E7 Activity. This property typically applies to tools, instruments, moulds, raw materials and items embedded in a product. It implies that the presence of the object in question was a necessary condition for the action. For example, the activity of writing this text required the use of a computer. An immaterial thing can be used if at least one of its carriers is present. For example, the software tools on a computer.Another example is the use of a particular name by a particular group of people over some span to identify a thing, such as a settlement. In this case, the physical carriers of this name are at least the people understanding its use.
This property describes an item or items that are regarded as a reason for carrying out the instance of E7 Activity. For example, the discovery of a large hoard of treasure may call for a celebration, an order from headquarters can start a military manoeuvre.
This property documents that an instance of E89 Propositional Object has as subject an instance of E1 CRM Entity. This differs from P67 refers to (is referred to by), which refers to an instance of E1 CRM Entity, in that it describes the primary subject or subjects of an instance of E89 Propositional Object.
This property specifies that the temporal extent of the domain instance A of E2 Temporal Entity starts before or simultaneously with the start of the temporal extent of the range instance B of E2 Temporal Entity. In other words, if A = [Astart, Aend] and B = [Bstart, Bend], we mean Astart ≤ Bstart is true.This property is part of the set of temporal primitives P173 – P176, P182 – P185.This property corresponds to a disjunction (logical OR) of the following Allen temporal relations (Allen, 1983): {before, meets, overlaps, starts, started-by, contains, finished-by, equals}In a model with fuzzy borders, this property will not be transitive.This property is irreflexive. Figure 12: Temporal entity A starts before or with the start of temporal entity B. Here A is longer than B Figure 13: Temporal entity A starts before or with the start of temporal entity B. Here A is shorter than B
This property specifies that the temporal extent of the domain instance A of E2 Temporal Entity ends definitely before the end of the temporal extent of the range instance B of E2 Temporal Entity. In other words, if A = [Astart, Aend] and B = [Bstart, Bend], we mean Aend end is true. This property is part of the set of temporal primitives P173 – P176, P182 – P185.This property corresponds to a disjunction (logical OR) of the following Allen temporal relations (Allen, 1983): {before, meets, overlaps, starts, during}.This property is transitive. This property is asymmetric. Figure 22: Temporal entity A ends before the end of temporal entity B. Here A is longer than B Figure 23: Temporal entity A ends before the end of temporal entity B. Here A is shorter than B
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I2 Belief with the instance of I5 Inference Making that used it as a premise.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I2 Belief with the instance of I1 Argumentation that concluded it.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I3 Inference Logic with the instance of I5 Inference Making that used it to draw its conclusion.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I4 Proposition Set with the instance of I2 Belief that holds an opinion about it.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I2 Belief with the I6 Belief Value that reflects the opinion of the instance of I2 Belief about the I4 Proposition Set associated with it.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I7 Belief Adoption with the instance of E73 Information Object hat a source of or evidence for the I4 Proposition Set that was adopted.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I7 Belief Adoption with the instance of I12 Adopted Belief that was established and possibly selected from the interpretation of the source or sources referred to by the property J14 adopted interpretation of. This property implies a relation of trust in the reliability of the sources. The actual believed content, i.e., propositions about some past reality that have been adopted from the source, should be documented using the property J4 that.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I12 Adopted Belief with a source or sources of interpretation from which the belief was established and possibly selected. In some cases of scholarly arguments, multiple source referring to a common topic may have been interpreted in order to form a particular belief about the topic referred to.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I7 Belief Adoption with an instance of I13 Intended meaning Belief about a meaning believed to be expressed in the source or sources referred to by the property J14 adopted interpretation of.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I13 Intended Meaning Belief with the instance of I4 Proposition Set that represents the meaning assumed by the holder of the belief to have been intended by the respective source. The latter source can be documented with the property J17 about (has interpretation).
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I13 Intended Meaning Belief with the instance of E73 Information Object that was a source of or evidence for the interpretation of its intended meaning. If sources are fragmentary about or complementary to a specific topic, more than one source may have been used.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I7 Belief Adoption with an instance of I14 Provenance Belief about the source or sources referred to by the property J14 adopted interpretation of, which justifies the conviction that the trusted and adopted content of the source, or its copy at hand, is actually identical, or sufficiently close to the assumed original and its context of creation.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I14 Provenance Belief with the instance of I10 Provenance Statement that holds an opinion about it.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I10 Provenance Statement with an instance of E70 Thing, the provenance of which the statement describes.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property describes the naming or identification of any real-world item by a name or any other identifier. This property associates an instance of I15 Provenance Assessment with an instance of I14 Provenance Belief that constitutes the conclusion of the assessment. An instance of I15 Provenance Assessment may conclude more than one instances of I14 Provenance Belief, typically about different objects considered in the same assessment.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I16 Meaning Comprehension with the instance of E73 Information Object that was the source of or evidence for the interpretation of its intended meaning. If sources are fragmentary about or complementary to a specific topic, more than one source may have been used.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property associates an instance of I16 Meaning Comprehension with the instance of I13 Intended Meaning Belief that was the result of the interpretation of the intended meaning of the analysed source(s).
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property describes the use of material or immaterial things in a way essential to the performance or the outcome of an instance of E7 Activity. This property typically applies to tools, instruments, moulds, raw materials and items embedded in a product. It implies that the presence of the object in question was a necessary condition for the action. For example, the activity of writing this text required the use of a computer. An immaterial thing can be used if at least one of its carriers is present. For example, the software tools on a computer.Another example is the use of a particular name by a particular group of people over some span to identify a thing, such as a settlement. In this case, the physical carriers of this name are at least the people understanding its use.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property describes an item or items that are regarded as a reason for carrying out the instance of E7 Activity. For example, the discovery of a large hoard of treasure may call for a celebration, an order from headquarters can start a military manoeuvre.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property documents that an instance of E89 Propositional Object has as subject an instance of E1 CRM Entity. This differs from P67 refers to (is referred to by), which refers to an instance of E1 CRM Entity, in that it describes the primary subject or subjects of an instance of E89 Propositional Object.
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property specifies that the temporal extent of the domain instance A of E2 Temporal Entity starts before or simultaneously with the start of the temporal extent of the range instance B of E2 Temporal Entity. In other words, if A = [Astart, Aend] and B = [Bstart, Bend], we mean Astart ≤ Bstart is true.This property is part of the set of temporal primitives P173 – P176, P182 – P185.This property corresponds to a disjunction (logical OR) of the following Allen temporal relations (Allen, 1983): {before, meets, overlaps, starts, started-by, contains, finished-by, equals}In a model with fuzzy borders, this property will not be transitive.This property is irreflexive. Figure 12: Temporal entity A starts before or with the start of temporal entity B. Here A is longer than B Figure 13: Temporal entity A starts before or with the start of temporal entity B. Here A is shorter than B
This property is the inverse of the forward property described in the scope note that follows. This property specifies that the temporal extent of the domain instance A of E2 Temporal Entity ends definitely before the end of the temporal extent of the range instance B of E2 Temporal Entity. In other words, if A = [Astart, Aend] and B = [Bstart, Bend], we mean Aend end is true. This property is part of the set of temporal primitives P173 – P176, P182 – P185.This property corresponds to a disjunction (logical OR) of the following Allen temporal relations (Allen, 1983): {before, meets, overlaps, starts, during}.This property is transitive. This property is asymmetric. Figure 22: Temporal entity A ends before the end of temporal entity B. Here A is longer than B Figure 23: Temporal entity A ends before the end of temporal entity B. Here A is shorter than B