CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing

CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing

Description:

A multi-causal ontology model - part of the CIDOC-CRM ontology family.

Status:

Ongoing Published

Reference namespace:

Contributors:

Martin Doerr, Dominic Oldman

Description

Show Description Language Validation
A multi-causal ontology model - part of the CIDOC-CRM ontology family. en Candidate

Contributors

Martin Doerr, Dominic Oldman Candidate

Identification

Base URI: http://www.cidoc-crm.org/cidoc-crm/influence/

Project of belonging: CRMInfluence

This namespace is ongoing and can be modified at any time. It is not advisable to use its classes and properties.

Namespace published and available since: 2024-02-21

Namespace to which this ongoing namespace refers

Namespace
CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3

Labels

Label Language Last updated Validation
CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing * en 2024-04-05 Candidate

* : Standard label for this language

Versions

CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing is an ongoing namespace.

Root namespace: CRMInfluence. A multi-causal ontology model - part of the CIDOC-CRM ontology family

Published versions

Namespace Publication date

Classes

Identifier Class Last updated Validation status
MO2 Mental Process 2024-04-04 Candidate
IN36 Observable Situation 2024-04-04 Candidate
EC74 Communicative Group 2024-04-04 Candidate
IN33 Societal Influence 2024-04-04 Candidate
IN34 Inner Influence 2024-04-04 Candidate
IN35 Environmental Influence 2024-04-04 Candidate
IN30 Influence 2024-04-04 Candidate
MO3 Observable Situation 2024-04-04 Candidate
EO1 Situation Type 2024-04-04 Candidate
EO2 Event Pattern 2024-04-04 Candidate
MO1 Mental Attitude 2024-04-04 Candidate
IN31 Individual Influence 2024-04-04 Candidate
IN32 Communicative Influence 2024-04-04 Candidate

Properties

Domain Domain namespace Identifier Property Range Range namespace Last updated Validation status
Inner Influence – IN34 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP63 was exerted during (was time-span of) Time-Span – E52 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Influence – IN30 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP70 is represented by (is representational of) Thing – E70 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Environmental Influence – IN35 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP67 was contributed to by (contributed to) Event – E5 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Environmental Influence – IN35 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP66 was experienced during (was_period_of) Period – E4 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Environmental Influence – IN35 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP65 was experienced at (was location of) Place – E53 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Environmental Influence – IN35 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP64 was exerted by (generated ) Observable Situation – MO3 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing 2024-04-04 Candidate
Inner Influence – IN34 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP62 was exerted by (produced) Information Object – E73 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Societal Influence – IN33 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP61 had contribution (contributed to) Event – E5 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Societal Influence – IN33 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP60 by the idea (was idea that generated) Conceptual Object – E28 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Societal Influence – IN33 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP59 was exerted during (was time span of) Time-Span – E52 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Societal Influence – IN33 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP58 was exerted by (was period of) Period – E4 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Communicative Influence – IN32 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP57 was exerted during (was time-span of) Time-Span – E52 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Communicative Influence – IN32 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP56 was exerted by (generated) Actor – E39 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Individual Influence – IN31 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP55 induced by encounter with (encounter motivated) Thing – E70 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Individual Influence – IN31 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP54 was specifically induced by (specifically induced) Event – E5 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Influence – IN30 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP53 was apparanet during (was associated with) Time-Span – E52 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Influence – IN30 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP52 lead to avoiding (was avoidedthrough) Situation Type – EO1 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing 2024-04-04 Candidate
Influence – IN30 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP51 was manifest in (incorporated) Activity – E7 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate
Influence – IN30 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing IP50 has influenced (has influenced) Actor – E39 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 Candidate

Relations

Filter by

Source Source namespace Relation Target Target namespace Last updated Type
Individual Influence – IN31 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Influence – IN30 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Communicative Influence – IN32 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Influence – IN30 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Societal Influence – IN33 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Influence – IN30 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Inner Influence – IN34 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Influence – IN30 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Environmental Influence – IN35 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Influence – IN30 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Mental Attitude – MO1 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Temporal Entity – E2 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Influence – IN30 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Mental Attitude – MO1 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Observable Situation – MO3 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Temporal Entity – E2 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Situation Type – EO1 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Type – E55 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Event Pattern – EO2 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Situation Type – EO1 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Communicative Group – EC74 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Group – E74 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Observable Situation – IN36 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Temporal Entity – E2 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation
Mental Process – MO2 CRMInfluence draft v2 ongoing rdfs:subClassOf Temporal Entity – E2 CIDOC CRM version 7.1.3 2024-04-04 ClassesRelation-HierarchyAssociation

Notes

Show Note Type Language Entity
Please note that in the model documentation, the range of this property is either crmflu:EC74 Communicative Group or crm:E21 Person. As it is not possible in OntoME to have two ranges for a property, the choice on import was made to use the common class immediately above, i.e. crm:E39 Actor. Here is an extract from the documentation: Influence on collective actors: As a first idea, let us consider a Group in the sense of the CRM, which can act as an individual, in contrast to a mass limited by parameters. Then evidence may just be sought in their common or representative activities and products. However, in order to argue about an influence common to identifiable collectives of people we should exclude groups which are led by representatives, such as large enterprises, institutions and nations. We have to assume that groups capable of acting as an individual under the same identifiable individual influence have a sort of shared understanding prior to acting by definition, broadly a shared mental attitude. Such shared understanding should normally be the result of communication among its members, characteristic for teams, and generally limiting the size of participants. For a mass of people, certain professions or religious confessions, social classes, we need to take a rather statistical stance, which is not part of the model, in which influence is an interpretation of a potential based on varied evidence from individuals or clearly collaborating groups. The model presented here aims at providing the empirical base and the means to document the necessary provenance of knowledge for arguing at such a collective level without falling into the traps of hidden epistemological biases of statistical arguments, well-described in respective literature, not to talk about intentional distortion of reality. To provide this differentiation a new class, EC74 Communicative Group is created which creates the necessary specialisation. For the time being, we use EC74 Communicative Group OR E21 Person as the range of the respective properties. A tentative “Communicative Actor” class may be introduced later to replace this construct adequately. Context note en crmflu:IP56 was exerted by (generated)
Please note that in the model documentation, the range of this property is either crmflu:EC74 Communicative Group or crm:E21 Person. As it is not possible in OntoME to have two ranges for a property, the choice on import was made to use the common class immediately above, i.e. crm:E39 Actor. Here is an extract from the documentation: Influence on collective actors: As a first idea, let us consider a Group in the sense of the CRM, which can act as an individual, in contrast to a mass limited by parameters. Then evidence may just be sought in their common or representative activities and products. However, in order to argue about an influence common to identifiable collectives of people we should exclude groups which are led by representatives, such as large enterprises, institutions and nations. We have to assume that groups capable of acting as an individual under the same identifiable individual influence have a sort of shared understanding prior to acting by definition, broadly a shared mental attitude. Such shared understanding should normally be the result of communication among its members, characteristic for teams, and generally limiting the size of participants. For a mass of people, certain professions or religious confessions, social classes, we need to take a rather statistical stance, which is not part of the model, in which influence is an interpretation of a potential based on varied evidence from individuals or clearly collaborating groups. The model presented here aims at providing the empirical base and the means to document the necessary provenance of knowledge for arguing at such a collective level without falling into the traps of hidden epistemological biases of statistical arguments, well-described in respective literature, not to talk about intentional distortion of reality. To provide this differentiation a new class, EC74 Communicative Group is created which creates the necessary specialisation. For the time being, we use EC74 Communicative Group OR E21 Person as the range of the respective properties. A tentative “Communicative Actor” class may be introduced later to replace this construct adequately. Context note en crmflu:IP50 has influenced (has influenced)

Comments

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.

Type of relation Entity Namespace Error type