search

yeniherdiyeni / infectious-disease-ontology

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/infectious-disease-ontology
0 stars 0 forks source link

asserted subclasses of fiat_object_part, object, object_aggregate #14

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago 
I saw that some classes were asserted directly under fiat_object_part,
object or object_aggregate.
Is that intended? I thought we would be using material_entity from now on
and not differentiate.
If it is intended, could you explain what is the advantage of using this
system vs. asserting directly under material_entity?
Thanks,
Melanie

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mcour...@gmail.com on 8 Sep 2009 at 8:26

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago 
word of warning ... the file you are looking at (if you are using the OWL file) 
was automatically generated and the 
hierarchy cannot be trusted.  in addition, many of the terms in that file are 
actually terms from OGMS.  

you say "i thought we would be using material_entity from now on ...".  by we, 
i assume you mean OBI.  in IDO, 
our strategy is to use the most specific BFO terms that is correct.

Original comment by lindsay....@utsouthwestern.edu on 22 Sep 2009 at 2:55

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago

Original comment by lindsay....@utsouthwestern.edu on 3 Nov 2009 at 9:21