PC11_had_participant and P11.1_in_the_role_of creation proposal

[illip]

In the last two Semantic Committee meetings (2021-02-04 and 2021-03-04) while we were discussing Issue #11, we thought it would be relevant to propose the creation of a new .1 property which would be P11.1_in_the_role_of.

Currently, there is no way to indicate the role of passive participants to an E5_Event or E7_Activity and we think that it might be relevant in several use cases. We believe that even if the E39_Actor is not responsible (or the cause) of the E5_Event it is still possible that he had a role in it.

Of course, if P11.1_in_the_role_of is created, that would mean adding it to the PC documentation with PC11_had_participant as well.

In our model, this would be useful at least at two places:

1. As I mentioned, it is issue Should the school years be modeled as being a member of a group? Would it be the same for professors? #11 that led us to this proposal because we believe that it would be interesting to be able to associate with the study activity of an E21_Person, the institution that offers the service. This institution is not responsible (or the cause of) for the student's study activity but it still plays a role in it. The pattern could look like this:

2. Our Relationships pattern is currently using E7_Activity as it is our only option in order to use PC14_carried_out_by:

However, we would rather prefer to use E5_Event with PC11_had_participant as the participants might not be responsible (or the cause) of the relationship. In fact, there are many use cases where the responsibility is unclear such as the relationship between adopted children and their non-biological grandparents or, even simpler, the half-sibling relationship. The new pattern would like this:

Under the recommendation of @Habennin, CHIN would like to put together a few more examples to demonstrate the relevance of creating P11.1_in_the_role_of in order to make an official proposal to the CRM-SIG.