Place relationships to Organizations over time

[saumier]

Artsdata ontology has introduced 4 new properties to model relationships between places and organizations that use them.

http://kg.artsdata.ca/ontology/usedBy
http://kg.artsdata.ca/ontology/managedBy
http://kg.artsdata.ca/ontology/ownedBy
http://kg.artsdata.ca/ontology/hasResident

My understanding is that the relationships between places and orgs in Artsdata are to reflect the current status without the need to qualify over a timespan.

In general, when the relationship changes in a source like Wikidata, the relationship is updated in Artsdata. When the usedBy relationship is inferred by Artsdata itself (using K1-203) based on a minimum of 3 events per year, then it should be removed if a year passes without 3 events. If a source, like Wikidata, store timespan for places that have changed ownership, then Artsdata should only store the current ownership and remove past ownerships when updated against the Wikidata source.

@fjjulien Please confirm?

[troughc]

@saumier thanks for asking this question. @fjjulien this question arose when Gregory was showing us the new properties. I thought of the example of La Ronde. 6 flags is selling la ronde after 60 years, so going forward La Ronde will be ownedBy a new organization. Does historical ownership of a place matter in the context of Artsdata?

I'd like to share some more feedback related to these properties:
I read the English comment (description) for hasResident:
Links a Place to an Organization that has a residency status within this Place. Some artistic companies have a special "residency" status within a venue. Resident companies aren't managing the venue, but they are given privileged access to the facilities by the venue manager for creation, production and presentation activities. For example, they are often given the opportunity to book their performance dates before rental clients. They may also be provided office space within the venue. en

IMHO the description is a little too detailed thereby potentially excluding certain real-world use cases. For example, Musée d'art contemporain de Montréal is "located on the Place des festivals in the Quartier des spectacles and is part of the Place des Arts complex. Founded in 1964, it is Canada's first museum devoted to contemporary art."

This organization is not a performing arts company (hence doesn't book performances in the way performing arts companies do). May I suggest simplifying the comment to this:
Links a Place to an Organization that has a residency status within this Place but does not manage the venue. Resident companies have privileged access to the facilities for creation, production and presentation activities. They may also be provided office space within the venue. en

For usedBy
Links a Place to an Organization that regularly uses this Place as an Event location. A minimum threshold of regularity should be met for this relationship to be true. As a rule of thumb, if an organization holds three events or more per year in a given place, one could deem a usedBy relationship to be present. en

I think setting limits to 3 times a year is somewhat arbitrary. What if an organization uses a venue for one year, several times, for a single type of event, and then never again? What if an organization uses the same venue every year once? For example "The CBC Montreal Christmas Sing-In, a beloved tradition since 1980 featuring carols at the Church of St. Andrew and St. Paul" was held once a year 1980 to 2020 (and may return). This is an example of the church being usedBy CBC once a year, every year.

May I suggest this change:
Links a Place to an Organization that regularly uses this Place as an Event location. A minimum threshold of regularity should be met for this relationship to be true. As a rule of thumb, if an organization regularly holds events every year in a given place, one could deem a usedBy relationship to be present. en

[fjjulien]

If a source, like Wikidata, store timespan for places that have changed ownership, then Artsdata should only store the current ownership and remove past ownerships when updated against the Wikidata source.

@saumier Yes. For ado:managedBy, ado:ownedBy and:hasResident, I believe it is best for Artsdata to only store current relationships, and to rely on Wikidata to store historic data.

Wikidata was purposely designed to store both historic and current data; we should take advantage of this strength, and avoid replicating data structures for which we have no immediate use case.

[fjjulien]

This organization is not a performing arts company (hence doesn't book performances in the way performing arts companies do). May I suggest simplifying the comment to this:
Links a Place to an Organization that has a residency status within this Place but does not manage the venue. Resident companies have privileged access to the facilities for creation, production and presentation activities. They may also be provided office space within the venue. en

@troughc This is a much better description than mine. Thanks.

[fjjulien]

ado:usedBy Should definitely be treated with some level of time sensitivity.

When the usedBy relationship is inferred by Artsdata itself (using K1-203) based on a minimum of 3 events per year, then it should be removed if a year passes without 3 events.

This makes sense. In RDF a triple is supposed to be always true. Consequently, if the conditions for an inferred statement no longer exist, the inferred triple should be deleted.

A problem will remain with the validity of Wikidata triples, though. These triples were added by Dessa or Morgan on the basis of their assessment at the precise point in time. If we want to ensure that Artsdata's data remains reliable, we should consider setting an "expiry date". For example, we could set rules to delete Wikidata-imported statement whose "retrieved" date is more than X years old.

[fjjulien]

This commit addresses @troughc 's suggestions.