Issue 357: FOL representation for shortcuts
Closing the issue 276, the sig assigned HW to CEO to check all shortcuts FOL formulation.
Heraklion, October 2018
posted by CEO on 10/1/2018
I searched for 'shortcut, and picked out all property definition containing the term. The attached file contains all these. Of course, not all contain shortcut defintions, but I have kept them in the file for reference. For the properties being defined as short cuts, I have added a FOL-definition and also done som minor corrections in the scope note.
I have formulated the FOL descriptions as definintions:
P8(x,y) ≡ ($z)[E53(z) ˄ P7(x,z) ˄ P156(y,z)]
By doing so I have assumed that all the short cuts are strong, which they are with a few exceptions, for example
P7(x,y) ≡ ($z)[ E2(x) ∧ E53(z) ∧ P161(x,z) ˄ P89(z,y)]
Since P161 has a superclass of E4 Period as domain, we have to add the E2(x) clause to ensure implication from right to left. If the clause is dropped the shortcut is of the ? type in (not strong, not weak).
In the 41st joined meeting of the CIDOC CRM SIG and ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9 and the 34th FRBR - CIDOC CRM Harmonization meeting, CEO has been assigned with checking all shortcuts FOL formulation.
Lyon, May 2018