search

semanticarts / gistBFO

Ontology for connecting Gist to BFO
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
3 stars 1 forks source link

Geospatial classes may be subclasses of continuant fiat boundary, site, or spatial region #8

Closed kstudzin closed 1 month ago

kstudzin commented 1 month ago

After looking at the CCO subclasses of continuant fiat boundary and site, it seems like gist geospatial classes are subclasses of these as well as of spatial region, as initially mapped.

Currently the pattern is to map the gist class to the single most specific super-class and to include further restrictions in an editorial note. Here, we would be losing a lot of information by stating that, for example, geo-segment is a subclass of immaterial entity rather than a subclass of fiat line or one-dimensional spatial region.

dylan-sa commented 1 month ago

I see what you mean. At first I was puzzled how cco:GeoSpatialRegion was not a subclass of BFO:SpatialRegion, but now I think I get it--a cco:GeoSpatialRegion could in principle change its BFO:SpatialRegion, and for this reason they must be distinct things. So, I could see making gist:GeoRegion, for example, a subclass of BFO:Site (or perhaps the union of BFO:Site and BFO:TwoDimensionalSpatialRegion). Ultimately some disjunctive definitions along the lines you describe will probably be useful for these.