mapping for Responsible Department

[VladimirAlexiev]

The mapping for Responsible Department doesn't show as image, instead "Welcome to PlantUML".

The mapping itself:

?entity_uri a crm:E22_Man-Made_Object ;
  crm:P46i_forms_part_of _:collection_class .
_:collection_class a crm:E19_Physical_Object ;
  rdfs:label ?collection_name ;
  owl:sameAs ?collection_class ;
  crm:P49_has_former_or_current_keeper _:department_class .
_:department_class a crm:E74_Group ;
  crm:P2_has_type <http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300263534> ;
  owl:sameAs ?department_class ;
  crm:P107i_is_current_or_former_member_of ?institution;
  rdfs:label ?department_name .

Has these problems:

• why P49_has_former_or_current_keeper and not P50_has_current_keeper ?
• why not a direct link to the department but go through some imaginary Collection?
• why the collection is E19_Physical_Object and not E78_Collection?
• the owl:sameAs are not specified, so let's see what the students make out of them

[VladimirAlexiev]

Predictably, there are no sameAs statements, http://yasgui.org/short/SkyPR-y9e

[workergnome]

Ignore the owl:sameAs statements in the queries generated by the review tool—they're artifacts left over from an experiment in the mapping tool and they're ignored throughout the actual mappings.

We don't use P50 or a direct link, because when an object is loaned to another institution, the custody of the object is transferred to that institution. They have temporary custody of the object during that time, and it wouldn't make sense to invalidate the fact that it is still part of the department every time it goes on loan.

Regarding why we don't use E78_Collection: This should be taken up with the CIDOC-CRM. They seem reasonably adamant that 'collections of objects are E19_Physical_Objects, and that Collection has a very specific meaning involving curation and a collection plan, and our understanding is that the departments aren't doing that specific type of activity. Personally, I think there should be a class for "human-selected collections of objects", but the CIDOC-CRM disagrees with me.

[azaroth42]

Yep. Hands are tied. Propose close.

[VladimirAlexiev]

• So why not use a direct P49 then?
• A department doesn't curate the collection it's responsible for? That is crazy
• The mapping for Responsible Department STILL doesn't show as image, instead "Welcome to PlantUML"

[workergnome]

Because even with a P49, I couldn't tell which of the many possible former holders is the responsible department. The only way I can think to do without ambiguity it is to generate the departmental collection.

As far as the E78_Collection thing—I agree it's stupid. But from my understanding of the scope notes and museum practice, it's not appropriate. My assumption is that the CRM's definition of a "particular collection development plan" and a museum's definition of a "particular collection development plan" are different enough that they're not compatible except for entire museum collections.

[workergnome]

(And the Responsible Department is already a known bug, #35).

[VladimirAlexiev]

• You don't track any loans, do you?
• About Collection: you could always argue to death. How's a museum collection a Collection, but a departmental one is not?