Proposed rename: solid astronomical body part -> landform

[cmungall]

The term landform is common, e.g. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=landform

yet we lack this as a token in ENVO

It belongs here:

http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000191

rdfs:label "solid astronomical body part"^^xsd:string definition "A part of an astronomical body which is primarily composed of a continuous volume of solid material, shaped by one or more environmental processes." has_related_synonym "geological feature"^^xsd:string has_related_synonym "physiographic feature"^^xsd:string database_cross_reference "EcoLexicon:landform"^^xsd:string database_cross_reference "EcoLexicon:landforms"^^xsd:string database_cross_reference "FTT:754"^^xsd:string database_cross_reference "FTT:96"^^xsd:string database_cross_reference "SWEETRealm:Landform"^^xsd:string database_cross_reference "TGN:21400"^^xsd:string database_cross_reference "TGN:21401"^^xsd:string

note we have many xrefs to systems that call this a landform. (in general it would be good to mine these as a source of synonyms).

I think adding a synonym should be uncontroversial. I propose going one step further and using 'landform' as the class label and relegating 'solid astronomical body part' to a systematic synonym.

This term doesn't appear in the literature at all:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22solid+astronomical+body+part%22

Note: this proposal can be implemented independently of the proposed new upper level grouping in #964 but they are related that they concern making the upper level more intuitive to non-ontologists.

[cmungall]

on second thoughts landform may not be an appropriately broad concept to cover some of the entities currently classified under SABP, e.g. deserts. This suggests that we may actually want a subclass here

[dr-shorthair]

"Landform" generally classifies finer scale geographic elements than 'desert' - e.g. see the standard Australian classification here: http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/soil/au/asls/landform - many desert-related elements, including dunefields and badlands and but not generic 'desert'

[smrgeoinfo]

The term landform needs to have a definition before trying to 'ontologize' it. I didnt' find one in the CSIRO LDR (? http://registry.it.csiro.au/?entity=http%3a%2f%2fanzsoil.org%2fdef%2fau%2fasls%2flandform ? ). The AGI Glossary has what seems like a good start "any physical recognizable form or feature of the Earth's Surface, having a characteristic shape and produced by natural causes.." Wikipedia is similar, but extends to include artificial features "a natural or artificial feature of the solid surface of the Earth or other planetary body." In a complete ontology, one would need to be clear about what 'feature' and 'form' are.

@brodaric has been working on this, and those concepts are being applied in the Geoscience Ontology we're implementing for the Loop3D project. In that framework a landform is a morphological feature, and from that point of view, a landform is hosted by Earth Material, not composed of EarthMaterial. It is defined by the shape of the Earth surface, and although there are common associations between kinds of material and the landforms they host, and between environmental settings and the landforms found in those settings, the identity of the landform is not dependent on these.

[dr-shorthair]

I transcribed a bit more of the introduction to the Australian classification into the register description here: http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/soil/au/asls/landform

[dr-shorthair]

The Australian landform classification from https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/4273240 is encoded here: https://vocabs.ardc.edu.au/viewById/314