Open wdduncan opened 5 months ago
If you are using spatial regions in an ontology you most likely shouldn't be. Can I ask what you are trying to represent?
This topic came up at the conference. I don't have a particular use case. Perhaps @johnbeve or @phismith want to weigh in.
In general, it seems odd that there exists a types independent continuant that can't bear a quality. Perhaps spatial region should be a type of IC? It also seems quite sensible that an line (i.e., one-dimensional spatial region) has a length, and a plane (i.e., two-dimensional spatial region) has a height and width.
@alanruttenberg Sending over my slides from the talk for context.
At Enhanced Object-Based Production Conference part two the issue was raised as to why qualities cannot specifically depend on spatial regions. See definition for specifically depends on:
I can see why it may be odd for a spatial region to bear a disposition, but it seems to me that a spatial region should be able to bear a quality (e.g., shape).