Art and Architectural Argumentation Ontology Version 2.0 ongoing
DOCX export options
Quantification
First Order Logic
Example of what will be added to the properties in the document
Quantification:
In First Order Logic:
one to many (0,n:0,1)
P1(x,y) ⇒ C1(x)
P1(x,y) ⇒ C2(y)
P1(x,y) ⇒ P2(x,y)
Art and Architectural Argumentation Ontology Version 2.0 ongoing
Description:
This document represents the formal specification for an unofficial formal extension of the CIDOC CRM designed for application in the area of art and architectural historical research. The scope of this extension is to support art and architectural research in the sense of the study of primary and secondary documents for the derivation, manually and programmatically, of historically contextual facts that can be used to support reflection and structured argumentation. The core expressivity that this extension adds is the ability to accurately express historically bound, contextual social facts relative to the agents holding those beliefs and the temporal period for which those beliefs were valid. The extension enables this expressivity by introducing the notions of institutional fact and speech act as core modelling concepts. Institutional facts are collective beliefs about the world held by groups for a period of time. Such collective beliefs, while subjectively grounded, are epistemically objective for the community over which they hold sway. Introducing the notion of institutional fact allows for a specialization of the core CRM to be able to express these social realities (expressed in simple, aoristic binary properties in the core CRM) in their full social complexity as temporally and socially bound beliefs. The concomitant core notion introduced in this extension is the idea of Speech Act in the Austinian and Serlean sense. A speech act is a kind of intentional event (E7 Activity of CRM base) in which agents purposefully apply a rule and perform a set practice in order to bring about a new social state or institutional fact. Introducing the notion of speech act provides both a high-level ontological category and set of relations for describing the kinds of events which are the cause of institutional facts as well as providing a starting point for the analysis of the non-truth propositional use of information objects. In speech acts, information objects (e.g. phrases and formulae) are deployed not to convey states of the world but to generate states of the world. The subject of historical investigation is not simply the bare facts available to an empirical analysis of the physical world but involves an investigation of the social activities which generated contexts of understanding and belief that may differ significantly across times and peoples. Materializing the social facts implicit in CRM base as explicit institutional facts gives them a richer ontological representation and offers a consistent epistemological approach to their study by recognizing social, negotiated facts as objective realities in themselves and treating them as first order entities of study. This involves a departure from the aims of CRM base which is guided by an information integration functionality which favours the representation of the latest state of knowledge in a presentist perspective. In the study of the history of art and architecture it is in no small part the different non-coinciding facts held or supported by different actors over different times which are of interest. The materialization of institutional facts supports the information management functionality which guides this informal extension of the CIDOC CRM and which aims to support historians in representing the positive knowledge they can gather from primary and secondary sources of evidence of both past simple and institutional facts for the purposes of proposing hypotheses and analyses of texts, authors, periods, works and so on. In this regard, AAAo also provides an initial limited set of classes for describing traditional and digital methods of deriving facts from texts, in order to support the linking of contemporary research processes as provenance nodes for the different data points of simple and institutional facts which they generate in the course of their research.
Examples Used
With this in mind, examples have been chosen which potentially support a variety of social facts. Some of these facts, i.e., those held by one group of people at some time or other, may directly contradict another, i.e., that held by a different group of people at some potentially different time. Most of the examples have been reused across different types of social fact, in order to tell more completely the history of the objects in question and the beliefs that have been held about them by specific groups of people over a given period of time. These histories can in themselves be quite complex. References are thus provided for further contextualization. These appear in brackets following the examples, like so:
- The Ownership Status (ZE8) of the Gʼpsgolox totem pole (E22) as 'has current owner' the Haisla people (E74) from 1872 - 2012 holds for the Haisla people (E74) and as 'has current owner' the Swedish National Museum of Ethnography (E74) from 1929 - 2006 holds for the Government of the Kingdom Sweden (E74). (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%CA%BCpsgolox_totem_pole)
Compatibility and Nomenclature
This unofficial extension of the CIDOC CRM is formulated in relation to the following official extensions:
- CIDOC CRM v.7.1.3
- CIDOC CRM Dig v.4.0
- CRMtex v.1.0
- LRM v.1.0
The specification consists of a set of declarations for formalized classes and properties that extend the CIDOC CRM and the above official extensions.
Adopting the conventions of the CIDOC CRM each class and property have been given an identifier in addition to their names. The naming convention adopted for this extension is:
ZE = class
ZP = property
The choice of these names was arbitrary, making a conceptual connection with the official CRM representation while clearly distinguishing the new classes and properties from those of either CRM base or its official extensions.
Namespace
https://ontology.swissartresearch.net/aaao
Maintenance and Archiving
AAAo is an actively maintained ontology. It is our aim to develop publicly and participatively, learning from and engaging with the scholarly community that adopts it. Towards this end we maintain the ontology with the following processes and relative tools.
Ontology Development
We adopt the OntoMe tool developed by LARHRA to manage the ontology and produce editions. This ensures a consistent management of the ontology and provides a public space to engage in revisions.
The maintenance space for the ontology can be found here: https://ontome.net/project/69
Please note, at time of publishing, OntoME is not capable of producing complete, provenanced RDF serializations, so please only use the official RDF for this standard stored on our github. See below.
Issue Management and Revision Storage
We adopt github as a platform for inviting and managing issues related to the ontology as well as providing an active place to be able to access the latest edition of the ontology, its specification and relevant documentation.
The address for the github repository is: https://github.com/swiss-art-research-net/aaao
Acknowledgements
The initiative for creating, developing and maintaining this ontology is made possible by important on-going funding and institutional commitment, which is gratefully acknowledged here.
Funding Support
- The development of the initial version (v0.9) of AAAo was initiated and generously funded by ETH Zurich, Chair of the History and Theory of Architecture, Prof. Maarten Delbeke.
- The continued development and enrichment of the latest version (v1.5) has been generously funded as part of the Open Research Data (ORD) initiative by swissuniversities.
Collaborations
Collaborations with the following projects provided important feedback and input for the testing and further elaboration of the standard:
The initial modelling around this extension have been supported by collaboration with:
- the Releven: Re-evaluating the Eleventh Century project
- the Globalise project
Institutional Support
The continuous maintenance and promotion of AAAo is made possible by the initial commitment of its partners to maintain the ontology and promote its understanding and adoption.
Status:
Reference namespaces:
Contributors:
Description
Description
This document represents the formal specification for an unofficial formal extension of the CIDOC CRM designed for application in the area of art and architectural historical research. The scope of this extension is to support art and architectural research in the sense of the study of primary and secondary documents for the derivation, manually and programmatically, of historically contextual facts that can be used to support reflection and structured argumentation. The core expressivity that this extension adds is the ability to accurately express historically bound, contextual social facts relative to the agents holding those beliefs and the temporal period for which those beliefs were valid. The extension enables this expressivity by introducing the notions of institutional fact and speech act as core modelling concepts. Institutional facts are collective beliefs about the world held by groups for a period of time. Such collective beliefs, while subjectively grounded, are epistemically objective for the community over which they hold sway. Introducing the notion of institutional fact allows for a specialization of the core CRM to be able to express these social realities (expressed in simple, aoristic binary properties in the core CRM) in their full social complexity as temporally and socially bound beliefs. The concomitant core notion introduced in this extension is the idea of Speech Act in the Austinian and Serlean sense. A speech act is a kind of intentional event (E7 Activity of CRM base) in which agents purposefully apply a rule and perform a set practice in order to bring about a new social state or institutional fact. Introducing the notion of speech act provides both a high-level ontological category and set of relations for describing the kinds of events which are the cause of institutional facts as well as providing a starting point for the analysis of the non-truth propositional use of information objects. In speech acts, information objects (e.g. phrases and formulae) are deployed not to convey states of the world but to generate states of the world. The subject of historical investigation is not simply the bare facts available to an empirical analysis of the physical world but involves an investigation of the social activities which generated contexts of understanding and belief that may differ significantly across times and peoples. Materializing the social facts implicit in CRM base as explicit institutional facts gives them a richer ontological representation and offers a consistent epistemological approach to their study by recognizing social, negotiated facts as objective realities in themselves and treating them as first order entities of study. This involves a departure from the aims of CRM base which is guided by an information integration functionality which favours the representation of the latest state of knowledge in a presentist perspective. In the study of the history of art and architecture it is in no small part the different non-coinciding facts held or supported by different actors over different times which are of interest. The materialization of institutional facts supports the information management functionality which guides this informal extension of the CIDOC CRM and which aims to support historians in representing the positive knowledge they can gather from primary and secondary sources of evidence of both past simple and institutional facts for the purposes of proposing hypotheses and analyses of texts, authors, periods, works and so on. In this regard, AAAo also provides an initial limited set of classes for describing traditional and digital methods of deriving facts from texts, in order to support the linking of contemporary research processes as provenance nodes for the different data points of simple and institutional facts which they generate in the course of their research.
Examples Used
With this in mind, examples have been chosen which potentially support a variety of social facts. Some of these facts, i.e., those held by one group of people at some time or other, may directly contradict another, i.e., that held by a different group of people at some potentially different time. Most of the examples have been reused across different types of social fact, in order to tell more completely the history of the objects in question and the beliefs that have been held about them by specific groups of people over a given period of time. These histories can in themselves be quite complex. References are thus provided for further contextualization. These appear in brackets following the examples, like so:
- The Ownership Status (ZE8) of the Gʼpsgolox totem pole (E22) as 'has current owner' the Haisla people (E74) from 1872 - 2012 holds for the Haisla people (E74) and as 'has current owner' the Swedish National Museum of Ethnography (E74) from 1929 - 2006 holds for the Government of the Kingdom Sweden (E74). (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%CA%BCpsgolox_totem_pole)
Compatibility and Nomenclature
This unofficial extension of the CIDOC CRM is formulated in relation to the following official extensions:
- CIDOC CRM v.7.1.3
- CIDOC CRM Dig v.4.0
- CRMtex v.1.0
- LRM v.1.0
The specification consists of a set of declarations for formalized classes and properties that extend the CIDOC CRM and the above official extensions.
Adopting the conventions of the CIDOC CRM each class and property have been given an identifier in addition to their names. The naming convention adopted for this extension is:
ZE = class
ZP = property
The choice of these names was arbitrary, making a conceptual connection with the official CRM representation while clearly distinguishing the new classes and properties from those of either CRM base or its official extensions.
Namespace
https://ontology.swissartresearch.net/aaao
Maintenance and Archiving
AAAo is an actively maintained ontology. It is our aim to develop publicly and participatively, learning from and engaging with the scholarly community that adopts it. Towards this end we maintain the ontology with the following processes and relative tools.
Ontology Development
We adopt the OntoMe tool developed by LARHRA to manage the ontology and produce editions. This ensures a consistent management of the ontology and provides a public space to engage in revisions.
The maintenance space for the ontology can be found here: https://ontome.net/project/69
Please note, at time of publishing, OntoME is not capable of producing complete, provenanced RDF serializations, so please only use the official RDF for this standard stored on our github. See below.
Issue Management and Revision Storage
We adopt github as a platform for inviting and managing issues related to the ontology as well as providing an active place to be able to access the latest edition of the ontology, its specification and relevant documentation.
The address for the github repository is: https://github.com/swiss-art-research-net/aaao
Acknowledgements
The initiative for creating, developing and maintaining this ontology is made possible by important on-going funding and institutional commitment, which is gratefully acknowledged here.
Funding Support
- The development of the initial version (v0.9) of AAAo was initiated and generously funded by ETH Zurich, Chair of the History and Theory of Architecture, Prof. Maarten Delbeke.
- The continued development and enrichment of the latest version (v1.5) has been generously funded as part of the Open Research Data (ORD) initiative by swissuniversities.
Collaborations
Collaborations with the following projects provided important feedback and input for the testing and further elaboration of the standard:
The initial modelling around this extension have been supported by collaboration with:
- the Releven: Re-evaluating the Eleventh Century project
- the Globalise project
Institutional Support
The continuous maintenance and promotion of AAAo is made possible by the initial commitment of its partners to maintain the ontology and promote its understanding and adoption.
Contributors
George Bruseker, Matthew Fielding, Denitsa Nenova, Rocio Jimenez ValidatedIdentification
Base URI: https://ontology.swissartresearch.net/aaao/
Project of belonging: Art and Architectural Argumentation: Ontology Engineering Project
This namespace is ongoing and can be modified at any time. It is not advisable to use its classes and properties.
Namespaces to which this ongoing namespace refers
Namespace |
---|
CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 |
CRMdig version 4.0
Referenced:
|
CRMtex version 2.0
Referenced:
|
LRMoo 1.0
Referenced:
|
Labels
Label | Language | Last updated | Validation |
---|---|---|---|
Art and Architectural Argumentation Ontology Version 2.0 ongoing * | en | 2025-02-07 | Validated |
* : Standard label for this language
Versions
Art and Architectural Argumentation Ontology Version 2.0 ongoing is an ongoing namespace.
Root namespace: Art and Architectural Argumentation Ontology
Published versions
Namespace | Publication date |
---|---|
Art and Architectural Argumentation Ontology Version 2.0 | 2025-02-07 |
Art and Architectural Argumentation Ontology Version 1.7.1 | 2025-01-22 |
Art and Architectural Argumentation Ontology Version 1.7 | 2025-01-13 |
Art and Architectural Argumentation Ontology Version 1.6 | 2024-11-26 |
CRM for Art and Architectural Argumentation Version 1.5.4 | 2024-06-24 |
CRM for Art and Architectural Argumentation Version 1.5 | 2023-10-31 |
Classes
Identifier | Class | Last updated | Validation status |
---|---|---|---|
ZE51 | Act of Authority | 2024-10-31 | Denied (see comment) |
ZE2 | Appellative Status | 2025-01-28 | Validated |
ZE50 | Authority Status | 2025-02-07 | Validated |
ZE4 | Classificatory Status | 2025-01-24 | Validated |
ZE47 | Commodity | 2024-10-10 | Denied (see comment) |
ZE3 | Contact Point Status | 2025-01-24 | Validated |
ZE18 | Critical Reading | 2025-02-06 | Validated |
ZE7 | Custodial Status | 2025-02-06 | Validated |
ZE26 | Dating Declaration | 2025-01-27 | Validated |
ZE25 | Dating Status | 2025-02-06 | Validated |
ZE57 | Declaration of Authority | 2024-10-31 | Denied (see comment) |
ZE27 | Declaration of Obligation | 2023-10-31 | Validated |
ZE20 | Declarative Acquisition | 2023-10-31 | Validated |
ZE34 | Declarative Dissolution | 2025-02-03 | Validated |
ZE33 | Declarative Formation | 2025-02-06 | Validated |
ZE22 | Declarative Joining | 2025-02-03 | Validated |
ZE23 | Declarative Leaving | 2025-01-28 | Validated |
ZE21 | Declarative Transfer of Custody | 2025-02-03 | Validated |
ZE17 | Digital Reading | 2025-02-06 | Validated |
ZE60 | Evental Locative Status | 2025-02-12 | Under revision |
ZE41 | Exchange Unit | 2024-10-18 | Denied (see comment) |
ZE10 | Family Status | 2025-01-31 | Validated |
ZE42 | Financial Exchange | 2024-10-18 | Denied (see comment) |
ZE5 | Function Status | 2025-02-06 | Validated |
ZE31 | Group Role Assignment | 2023-10-31 | Denied (see comment) |
Properties
Relations
Filter by
Source | Relation | Target | Last updated |
---|---|---|---|
Actor – E39 | rdfs:subClassOf | Persons – ZE36 | 2024-10-21 |
Appellative Status – ZE2 | rdfs:subClassOf | Institutional Fact – ZE1 | 2023-05-22 |
ascribes appellation (is appellation ascribed by) – ZP6 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional target (is intentional target ascribed by) – ZP2 | 2023-05-22 |
ascribes appellative relation (is appellative relation ascribed by) – ZP7 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional relation (is intentional relation ascribed by) – ZP3 | 2023-05-22 |
ascribes authority status (is authority status ascribed by) – ZP97 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes social status (is social status ascribed by) – ZP18 | 2025-02-03 |
ascribes authority status relation (is authority status relation ascribed by) – ZP116 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional relation (is intentional relation ascribed by) – ZP3 | 2024-11-18 |
ascribes classification (is classification ascribed by) – ZP12 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional target (is intentional target ascribed by) – ZP2 | 2023-05-22 |
ascribes classification relation (is classification relations ascribed by) – ZP13 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional relation (is intentional relation ascribed by) – ZP3 | 2023-05-22 |
ascribes contact point (is contact point ascribed by) – ZP9 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes appellation (is appellation ascribed by) – ZP6 | 2023-05-23 |
ascribes contact point relation (is contact point relation ascribed by) – ZP10 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes appellative relation (is appellative relation ascribed by) – ZP7 | 2023-05-23 |
ascribes custodial relation (is custodial relation ascribed by) – ZP22 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional relation (is intentional relation ascribed by) – ZP3 | 2023-05-22 |
ascribes custodian (is custodian ascribed by) – ZP21 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional target (is intentional target ascribed by) – ZP2 | 2023-05-22 |
ascribes dating relation (is dating relation ascribed by) – ZP56 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional relation (is intentional relation ascribed by) – ZP3 | 2023-11-28 |
ascribes debtee (is debtee ascribed by) – ZP60 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes promisee (is promisee ascribed by) – ZP86 | 2024-10-18 |
ascribes debtor (is debtor ascribed by) – ZP58 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional target (is intentional target ascribed by) – ZP2 | 2024-10-08 |
ascribes debtor (is debtor ascribed by) – ZP58 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes promisor (is promisor ascribed by) – ZP87 | 2024-10-08 |
ascribes event location relation (is event location relation ascribed by) – ZP119 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional relation (is intentional relation ascribed by) – ZP3 | 2024-10-31 |
ascribes familial relation (is familial relation ascribed by) – ZP31 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes social relation (is social relation ascribed by) – ZP104 | 2024-10-19 |
ascribes function (is function ascribed by) – ZP15 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes classification (is classification ascribed by) – ZP12 | 2023-05-22 |
ascribes functional relation (is functional relation ascribed by) – ZP16 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes classification relation (is classification relations ascribed by) – ZP13 | 2023-05-22 |
ascribes group (is group ascribed by) – ZP33 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional target (is intentional target ascribed by) – ZP2 | 2023-05-22 |
ascribes institutional status (is institutional status ascribed by) – ZP72 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes social status (is social status ascribed by) – ZP18 | 2023-05-24 |
ascribes institutional status relation (is institutional status relation ascribed by) – ZP73 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes social status relation (is social status relation ascribed by) – ZP19 | 2023-05-24 |
ascribes location relation (is location relation ascribed by) – ZP84 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional relation (is intentional relation ascribed by) – ZP3 | 2024-11-19 |
ascribes membership relation (is membership relation ascribed by) – ZP34 | rdfs:subPropertyOf | ascribes intentional relation (is intentional relation ascribed by) – ZP3 | 2023-05-22 |
List of mismatches with reference namespaces
Entities listed here are not correctly associated with your reference namespaces.
They are displayed in red in your ongoing namespace. They may not be available in the version of the selected space.
Or you may not have selected any version of a reference namespace.
Please make the necessary corrections before proceeding.
Comments
No comment found.