Open StroemPhi opened 1 year ago
And RO_in_COB:'characteristic of' is not declared functional although it should be according to the docs and RO:'characteristic of'.
@StroemPhi you raise a lot of great points..
I just wanted to wish you strength and patience, wholeheartedly, and recommend that you break this ticket down into as small pieces as possible. Read issues like #452 or #341 for your own pleasure.
Maybe we could:
characteristic of
I think the biggest problem with COB is (what makes it so slow) is that we want to align it with BFO. Balancing the messiness of biology (disease as material entity vs SDC vs process vs disposition) with the idealistic vision of assigning everything to BFO for some artificial ontological clarity needs to shift towards the former.
@matentzn I tried to break all that I could grasp down to individual pieces with the formating. What you propose is essentially what I wrote in 3. apart from the alignemt with BFO. And I guess "2.", the missing domain contraint on RO:characteristic of', is not so important at the moment, as it is implied via the inverse relation anyway.
initially asked on Slack by me :
@cmungall replied
Then I looked more closely into the issue and made these observations:
characteristic
in the current textual definition of RO:'characteristic of' should actually, within the COB context, be understood as the original PATO:quality, which is not BFO aligned and thus no BFO:SDC, and, which would render the current textual definition of RO:'characteristic of' incorrect. Hence, your rewrite proposal.COB:0000502 owl:equivalentClass BFO:0000020
) would have to be removed.RO:'has / characteristic / of'
relation pair, you would have to:"a relation between a characteristic and any other entity (the bearer)"
,"a relation between a characteristic (a dependent entity) and any other entity (the bearer)"
dependent entity
is to be understood in a BFO context as the union of BFO:DC and BFO:SDC,