exposure event and BFO

[diatomsRcool]

Please make ExO exposure event a subclass of BFO process. This will bring it in line with OBO Core and will help us with our ECTO development.

[cjgrondin]

Please make ExO exposure event a subclass of BFO process. This will bring it in line with OBO Core and will help us with our ECTO development. exposure event is currently a top level term for ExO, that aligns with exposure stressor, exposure receptor and exposure outcome. By making exposure event a subclass of BFO process, I'm not sure that adds or clarifies anything for ExO, just changes the top level structure (and consequently it becomes a subclass of occurrent and entity (?) since process is_a occurrent and occurrent is_a entity). Can you please clarify how this will help ECTO development and what are the consequences for ExO?

[diatomsRcool]

It would make ExO more reusable by other OBO ontologies by becoming more in line with OBO Core. We would like for ECTO to also be in line with OBO Core because we want it to be reused and incorporated into larger knowledge infrastructures. We would also like to continue to incorporate ExO in ECTO. If ExO does not become OBO Core compliant, then we have to make a decision about whether ECTO becomes compliant or it stops using ExO. As far as making exposure event a subclass of occurrent and entity I will have to defer to @matentzn. I understand that a thing cannot both be an occurrent and an entity, but I'm a little foggy on where process is_a occurrent and occurrent is_a entity is stated. Is that in BFO? OBO Core?

[cjgrondin]

It would make ExO more reusable by other OBO ontologies by becoming more in line with OBO Core. We would like for ECTO to also be in line with OBO Core because we want it to be reused and incorporated into larger knowledge infrastructures. We would also like to continue to incorporate ExO in ECTO. If ExO does not become OBO Core compliant, then we have to make a decision about whether ECTO becomes compliant or it stops using ExO. As far as making exposure event a subclass of occurrent and entity I will have to defer to @matentzn. I understand that a thing cannot both be an occurrent and an entity, but I'm a little foggy on where process is_a occurrent and occurrent is_a entity is stated. Is that in BFO? OBO Core?

I found that in a BFO Tutorial (Barry Smith): )

[cjmattin]

nvm! I see that you are

---

Carolyn Mattingly, PhD Professor and Head University Faculty Scholar Co-Director, IHSFC, Center for Human Health and the Environment http://chhe.research.ncsu.edu/ North Carolina State University Department of Biological Sciences 3510 Thomas Hall Campus Box 7614 Raleigh, NC 27695

Office: (919) 515-1509 Lab: (919) 515-2024 Mattingly Lab website http://mattinglylab.com/ Comparative Toxicogenomics Database http://ctdbase.org/ Preferred pronouns: she/her/hers http://ctdbase.org/

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:06 AM cjgrondin notifications@github.com wrote:

It would make ExO more reusable by other OBO ontologies by becoming more in line with OBO Core. We would like for ECTO to also be in line with OBO Core because we want it to be reused and incorporated into larger knowledge infrastructures. We would also like to continue to incorporate ExO in ECTO. If ExO does not become OBO Core compliant, then we have to make a decision about whether ECTO becomes compliant or it stops using ExO. As far as making exposure event a subclass of occurrent and entity I will have to defer to @matentzn https://github.com/matentzn. I understand that a thing cannot both be an occurrent and an entity, but I'm a little foggy on where process is_a occurrent and occurrent is_a entity is stated. Is that in BFO? OBO Core?

I found that in a BFO Tutorial (Barry Smith): [image: image] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22403969/72162724-776a8c00-3390-11ea-801e-d00ff37f936f.png )

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/CTDbase/exposure-ontology/issues/10?email_source=notifications&email_token=ACDDWRS2WZCNVE7OBQNGJ33Q5CFHLA5CNFSM4KEKFMR2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEIUGCOY#issuecomment-573071675, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACDDWRVQIYEZKWMEH5YH7Z3Q5CFHLANCNFSM4KEKFMRQ .

[diatomsRcool]

I misspoke earlier. It's ok for a class to be an occurrent and an entity. A class cannot be an occurrent and a continuant. Making ExO exposure event a subclass of BFO process may have one consequence for ExO. If you make exposure event a process it will limit the relationships that can be used for exposure events. For example, you will not be able to say that an exposure is "part of" some material entity. I don't know if you actually use any of these sorts of relationships. If not, then there is no problem. Does that make sense?

[cjgrondin]

Ok, doesn't sound like it should be a problem to make Exposure Event a subclass of BFO process

[cjgrondin]

Resolved in pull request #12