Dear all, there was an issue opened here:
https://cidoc-crm.org/Issue/ID-576-about-...-entity-of-type The issue under discussion was whether we could / should make additions to the CIDOC CRM to handle common cases of 'aboutness' so that there was a standard way of doing it, rather than relying on external thesauri and / or specific modelling tricks like types of type to do the work. While it seemed like a nice idea, it is difficult to identify what would be the correct subset of 'things of type' which would warrant specific modelling constructs and not lead us down a rabbit hole of generating many properties or types for this one specific problem. Therefore, after discussion, Martin and I propose we close this issue as a good idea, but without sufficient insight to bring to a reliable monotonically stable ontological conclusion. Best, George
_______________________________________________ Crm-sig mailing list [email protected] http://cidoc-crm.org/crm-sig-mailing-list
