On Apr 2, 2012, at 4:53 AM, Tom De Nies wrote: > +1 > > I had trouble understanding the reasoning of this example as well.. > In our data model, the email would rather be a collection, and the signature an element of it, rather than a specialization of it. > A specialization of "this email" would be, for example. the "printed version on my desk", which is a specialization of "my thoughts on this email thread". > +1 (your phrasing is exactly what FRBR addresses; we're borrowing their notions to create a simpler form with atlOf and specOf) > Intuitively, I am having trouble coming up with a counterexample of the transitivity of our specialization. Me too. -Tim > > Regards, > Tom > --- > Tom De Nies > Ghent University - IBBT > Faculty of Engineering and Architecture > Department of Electronics and Information Systems - Multimedia Lab > Gaston Crommenlaan 8 bus 201, B-9050 Ledeberg-Ghent, Belgium > > t: +32 9 331 49 59 > e: tom.denies@ugent.be > > URL: http://multimedialab.elis.ugent.be > > > > 2012/4/2 Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> > > is this example really reflecting specialisation? The signature is contained in the email message. Is it a specialisation of it? > > On 2 Apr 2012, at 00:11, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote: > > > My signature in the end of this email is a specialization of this > > email message, which is a specialization of my thoughts on this email > > thread. However the signature is not a specialization of those > > thoughts. > >
Received on Monday, 2 April 2012 12:39:51 UTC