Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
executable file
·
70 lines (38 loc) · 2.68 KB

WORKING_NOTES.md

File metadata and controls

executable file
·
70 lines (38 loc) · 2.68 KB
Raw

PERIOD: ["Possibly"] ["in" ] [("by"|"to") ( ] ["for" ] [] [] <";"|".">

PARTY ENTITY: | ( <LOCATION_ENTITY>) LOCATION ENTITY: |

Possibly purchased in Pittsburgh, PA by David Newbury [1980-], Emlenton, PA for Jane Pendleton [1962-], Chicago, IL sometime between 1998 and May 10, 2001 [1].

Notes:

  1. This is the footnote for the first period.

Bibliography:

References:

See also Pittsburgh: geonames:123456; Pittsburgh, PA: geonames: 23456. See also Durand Ruel Galleries: viaf:12345.

David Newbury: http://records.cmoa.org/parties/12345567

Outstanding Questions:

  • Do we want to add nuance to an entire record?
  • Dealer transactions. Are they still needed?
  • Named Entity Recognition for footnotes?

Dynasties for dates?

  • Lookup list for dynasties to dates?
  • Online Encyclopedia of Ancient

Special Case "With"???

Do we need to think about "At??"

Repatriated vs Restituted

  • see unesco

  • Returned to "The term ‘return’ should apply to cases where objects left their countries of origin prior to the crystallization of national and international law on the protection of cultural property. Such transfers of ownership were often made from a colonized territory to the territory of the colonial power or from a territory under foreign occupation. In many cases, they were the result of an exchange, gift or sale and did not therefore infringe any laws existing at the time. In some cases, however, the legitimacy of the transfer can be questioned. Among the many variants of such a process is the removal of objects from a colonial territory by people who were not nationals of the colonial power. There may have also been cases of political or economic dependence which made it possible to effect transfers of ownership from one territory to another which would not be envisaged today."

    • Restituted to "the term ‘restitution’ should be used ‘in case of illicit appropriation’, i.e. when objects have left their countries of origin illegally, according to the relevant national legislations and with particular reference to UNESCO’s 1970 Convention on the subject."
      • Recovered by "recovery should not mean totality"
      • Repatriated to State to tribe or culture?
      • Retrieved by "retrieval should be at the initiative of the country of origin"

http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/files/39308/12458323313Terminology.pdf/Terminology.pdf

https://github.com/vkaravir/bib-publication-list

http://d-nb.info/standards/elementset/agrelon.owl#RelatedAgent