CIDOC CRM is a conceptual framework/ontology (not one of my favorite words)
expressed as an object oriented model.
The CIDOC CRM SIG decided to make CRM an ISO standard to make it stable as
on of my fellow SIG members express it:
"I'm very surprised that the TEI folks consider ISO standards to be
"proprietary"! ISO standards are NOT proprietary -- in fact, the whole
point of publishing standards through an international standards body such
as ISO is to PREVENT self-serving corporate interests from influencing the
design and maintenance of the standard."
CRM and TEI
The CRM is the result of more than 10 years of work and covers both the
Cultural Heritage Museums and Natural History. We (my organization) develop
databases for the university museums (archaeology, ethnography and natural
history) and find CRM really useful.
We are also participating in the Menota activity (Medieval Nordic Text
Archive, www.menota.org). The Menota has published "Guidelines for
electronic encoding of Medieval Nordic Primary Sources".(see
http://helmer.aksis.uib.no/menota/guidelines/index.html). The Menota
recommendations are based on an extension the TEI-dtd and on the Master
project. The Master project dtd developed some elements for encoding
information about places and persons. Combined with the elements from the
TEI proper one has some tools to encode semantic content. But it is not
sufficient for the encoding of content (and meta-information) in e.g.
medieval charters or in older archeological field reports. Neither of
the two genresare literaturebut should non the less be in the scope of the
TEI. Among archaeologists there is a growing interest to use XML to
extract information from older texts but also a wish to create more verbose
reports. In my opinion one should develop a set of recommendations and an
extension/module in TEI in a CRM spirit with a well defined mapping to the
CRM. This is not very complicated and I think we (the TEI community) should
create a SIG for this.
The Museum Project/Unit for Digital Documentation
University of Oslo
At 12:57 24.05.2004 +0100, Richard Light wrote:
><[log in to unmask]>,
>Merrilee Proffitt <[log in to unmask]> writes
>>I believe that CIDOC CRM is a conceptual framework, much along the lines of
>>the Funtional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), or the Open
>>Archives Information System (OAIS) Reference Model. A conceptual framework
>>can well become an ISO standard without having an encoding mechanism, and a
>>standard such as CIDOC CRM can provide useful fodder for discussion of
>>complex concepts across communities.
>According to its web site
>(http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/comprehensive_intro.html), the CIDOC CRM is
>an object-oriented model, which "represents an 'ontology' for cultural
>heritage information i.e. it describes in a formal language the explicit
>and implicit concepts and relations relevant to the documentation of
>cultural heritage. The primary role of the CIDOC CRM is to serve as a
>basis for mediation of cultural heritage information and thereby provide
>the semantic 'glue' needed to transform today's disparate, localised
>information sources into a coherent and valuable global resource."
>In other words, there is nothing in the published CRM which you can
>"drop in" to the TEI as a ready-to-use module. While this means there
>is work to be done (not least to capture the feature inheritance implied
>within the underlying object-oriented model), it surely also means that
>anything produced within a TEI work group would not be subject to
>copyright claims by ISO.
>SGML/XML and Museum Information Consultancy
>[log in to unmask]