Open agbeltran opened 2 years ago
I checked this and agree that 'inelastic x-ray scattering' should be a subclass of 'x-ray scattering'.
This is not currently the case because 'inelastic x-ray scattering' is defined as (subclass of) 'inelastic scattering' and 'x-ray probe'.
'x-ray scattering' is defined as a subclass of 'x-ray probe' and 'scattering technique'. If, instead, it was equivalent to 'x-ray probe' and 'scattering technique' then the reasoner should show 'x-ray scattering' as an inferred parent class of 'inelastic x-ray scattering'.
So, the question is, should we use subclass or equivalent class for 'x-ray scattering'. That is, are we saying that it is necessary and sufficient for 'x-ray scattering' to be a subclass of 'x-ray probe' and 'scattering technique', or is it merely necessary? I think the latter is safer as one might envisage techniques that involve scattering and have an x-ray probe, that are not x-ray scattering.
I therefore propose to keep the definition of 'x-ray scattering' as it is, but to change 'inelastic x-ray scattering' from (subclass of) 'inelastic x-ray scattering' and 'x-ray probe' to (subclass of) 'inelastic x-ray scattering' and 'x-ray scattering'.
This makes very little difference (see below) but now gives 'x-ray scattering' as parent of 'inelastic x-ray scattering'.
current parents of 'inelastic x-ray scattering':
inelastic x-ray scattering (Alt. Labels: IXS) x-ray probe photon probe defined by experimental probe inelastic scattering incoherent scattering scattering technique defined by experimental physical process photon and neutron technique
=== No. of subclasses of IXS: 9
change definition of 'inelastic x-ray scattering' to (subclass of) 'inelastic scattering' + 'x-ray scattering'
Parent classes:
inelastic x-ray scattering (Alt. Labels: IXS) inelastic scattering incoherent scattering x-ray scattering scattering technique defined by experimental physical process x-ray probe photon probe defined by experimental probe photon and neutron technique
=== No. of subclasses of IXS: 10
Correction: I meant to write:
I therefore propose to keep the definition of 'x-ray scattering' as it is, but to change 'inelastic x-ray scattering' from (subclass of) 'inelastic scattering' and 'x-ray probe' to (subclass of) 'inelastic scattering' and 'x-ray scattering'.
should
inelastic x-ray scattering
be a child ofx-ray scattering
? - this seems to be missing from the current hierarchy