search

obi-ontology / obi

The Ontology for Biomedical Investigations
http://obi-ontology.org
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
74 stars 24 forks source link

acquisition #690

Open obi-bot opened 10 years ago

obi-bot commented 10 years ago

Acquisition is currently a subclass of selection. I think that selection is generally a prerequisite of acquisition, but I don't think acquisition is a type of selection. To me it would make more sense if they were sibling classes.

Reported by: ramonawalls

Original Ticket: obi/obi-terms/704

obi-bot commented 10 years ago

Can you make the argument based on the given definitions of the terms? An example of such an argument would be to describe an instance of acquisition that doesn't satisfy the definition of selection.

-Alan

On Thursday, May 15, 2014, Ramona Walls rwalls@users.sf.net wrote:

  • [obi-terms:#704] acquisition*

Status: open Group: plan-and-planned-process Created: Thu May 15, 2014 08:58 PM UTC by Ramona Walls Last Updated: Thu May 15, 2014 08:58 PM UTC Owner: nobody

Acquisition is currently a subclass of selection. I think that selection is generally a prerequisite of acquisition, but I don't think acquisition is a type of selection. To me it would make more sense if they were sibling classes.

Sent from sourceforge.net because you indicated interest in https://sourceforge.net/p/obi/obi-terms/704/

To unsubscribe from further messages, please visit https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions/

Original comment by: alanruttenberg

obi-bot commented 10 years ago

Selection is defined as "A planned process which results in the creation of group of entity from a larger group by the application of predefined criteria" (leaving aside for the time being issues with the definitions using the word group, see issue 703). Acquisition is defined as " the planned process of gaining possession of a continuant"

I can't really come up with an example of acquisition that does not include selection, even when the predefined criteria are simply random drawing. However, I see selection as part of the acquisition process, not a parent term. I would rather see acquisition has_part selection than acquisition is_a selection.

The reason I bring this up is because in the BCO, we defined material sampling process as having as parts a selection process, a physical extraction process, and a submitting process (as in submitting to an institution). We have now replaced our term with OBI:specimen collection, and I am trying to make sure they are compatible. OBI does not specify that selecting is part of a specimen collection, but I would like to see that added. I don't think submitting process needs to be part of the OBI definition, because that is specific to museum or repository specimen collection, and is covered by the objective to obtain and store a material entity for potential use as an input during an investigation. I think that OBI's term for acquisition is very similar to what we had in mind with BCO for physical extraction and could be used in its place, if the definition were appropriate.

What I would ultimately like to see asserted is OBI:specimen collection has_part OBI:selection and OBI:specimen collection has_part OBI:acquisition (or something similar).

Original comment by: ramonawalls

obi-bot commented 10 years ago

Actually, what I should have written was that OBI:specimen collection has_part OBI:acquisition. Then, if acquisition has_part selection, it could be inferred that specimen collection has_part selection.

Original comment by: ramonawalls