arm

Markings

RareMat and ArtFrame, 2018.03.16

Table of Contents

Introduction

Markings, as defined in AAT, are “Standardized symbols, notations, or other markings applied to objects during or after creation, conveying information such as the object’s origin or maker, its authenticity, or a change in its official status.”

We contrast such markings with marginalia and other unofficial markings applied by individual users outside the creation or production process or custodial history of an object, noting that in some cases the distinction may be subtle. For example, a binding autograph by the binding designer (see Sample Data is distinguished here from an autograph hand-written in a book, by an author, owner, gift-giver, etc., when transferring ownership to another agent. In-depth pursuit of the distinctions and modeling issues is left for future research. Preliminary remarks are made in Appendix.

Sample Data

“Pictorial cloth binding with gold, brown, and green stamping on brown calico-textured cloth, designed by Margaret Armstrong; signed: M.A.” (signature is near the bottom, just right of center).

Markings in BIBFRAME

By intent, BIBFRAME does not provide deep modeling of resource components or physical description; these areas are left to domain extensions.

Overview of the RareMat and ArtFrame Marking Model

The Marking model is quite simple, involving a class hierarchy descending from a Marking superclass, and a pair of predicates to relate the Marking to the object marked. Other modeling derives from other Raremat/ArtFrame models such as Activities and Materials, as well as standard terms used in the Raremat/ArtFrame application profiles for dates, descriptions, and other properties.

Diagram

Markings diagram

Notes

Term Specifications

Classes

ex:Marking

ex:Autograph

ex:BindersTicket

ex:Inscription

ex:Label

ex:Seal

ex:Stamp

ex:Watermark

Properties

ex:marks (ObjectProperty)

ex:markedBy (ObjectProperty)

Sample RDF

:binding a ex:Binding ;
    ex:markedBy :marking ;
    ex:hasActivity :activity1 .

:marking a ex:Autograph ;
    rdf:value “M.A.” ;
    ex:hasActivity :activity2 .

:activity1 a ex:DesignerActivity ;
    bf:agent :margaret_armstrong .

:activity2 a ex:CreatorActivity ;
    bf:agent :margaret_armstrong .

Areas for Future Research

Appendix. Markings and Marginalia

As noted in the Introduction, we make a distinction between the Markings modeled here and marginalia and other unofficial markings applied by individual users, rather than as an element of the creation or production process of the object, or of its custodial history. In-depth pursuit of the distinction and modeling is left for future research, but we make some preliminary remarks here.

As noted, this distinction may be elusive. For example, a binding autograph by the binding designer (see Sample Data) may be distinguished from an autograph hand-written in a book, by an author, owner, gift-giver, etc., when transferring ownership to another agent. If we maintain the distinction, then we would define another class hierarchy for the second category of marking, which could include marginalia, hand-written dedications and autographs, bookplates, and others. The dilemma is that some of the subclasses defined here cut across these two major types; e.g., Autograph, Stamp, and Seal can be of either type, so maintaining two disjoint class hierarchies seems artificial. How else could the distinction be made?

Approaches that will not work:

Possible approaches: