search

iofoundry / ontology

MIT License
30 stars 12 forks source link

Check superclass of iof-maint:maintenanceStateOF #88

Open mhodki opened 1 month ago

mhodki commented 1 month ago

Suggestion from Johan Kluwer: In the maintenance ontology, the OP ‘maintenance state of’ (iof-maint:maintenanceStateOf) is a subclass of ‘has participant at all times’ (obo:BFO_0000167).

The latter is not included in the latest BFO version, i.e., not in the OWL version at https://github.com/BFO-ontology/BFO-2020.

I haven’t spent the time to investigate closely, but the reason is probably that some revision is happening wrt. the use or non-use of temporal relations. This means that when you open the current Maintenance ontology, you’ll actually see ‘has participant at all times’ like before, but – surely at some point the BFO in OWL at http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/bfo/2020/bfo.owl is going to be updated, and then ‘maintenance state of’ will likely not have a superproperty available, since it’s not going to be included.

Actually, I think this could best be solved by a correction in the maintenance ontology, since I think you picked the wrong inverse for ‘participates in’. The inverse is obo:BFO_0000057 (the “at some time” variant), not BFO_0000167 (“at all times”).

mhodki commented 1 month ago

We think that we need a TOB decision here as iof-maint imports iof-core which imports BFO-2020-with-temporalised-relations. @wsobel - what is the plan for IOF? Are you going to continue to use temporalised relations? Please can you let us know.

@johanwk

wsobel commented 1 month ago

That is above my pay grade. This is a TOB decision. The BFO we are using is the one in the cache bfo directory and we are using temporalized. I don’t think we’ve had a serious discussion. The core team should address this as well. That being Milos and Arco. BestW(Sent from mobile)On May 28, 2024, at 02:24, Melinda Hodkiewicz @.***> wrote: We think that we need a TOB decision here as iof-maint imports iof-core which imports BFO-2020-with-temporalised-relations. @wsobel - what is the plan for IOF? Are you going to continue to use temporalised relations? Please can you let us know. @johanwk

—Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>