search

zhengj2007 / bfo-export

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/bfo
0 stars 0 forks source link

Label proposal, located_at, occupies, spans -> occupies_spatial_region, occupies_spatiotempoal_region, occupies_temporal_region #109

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
located_at -> occupies_spatial_region
occupies -> occupies_spatiotemporal_region
spans -> occupies_temporal_region

This would draw to attention the parallels between the relations and remove 
confusion between located_at, located_in

Original issue reported on code.google.com by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 14 Jul 2012 at 5:41

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I strongly second this proposal. Users will get used to longer labels anyway, 
and they will end up appreciating the unambiguousness of this.

Original comment by steschu@gmail.com on 18 Jul 2012 at 2:25

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
My understanding is that Barry concurs and that i am to implement this in the 
reference and the OWL file

Original comment by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 19 Jul 2012 at 2:05

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 19 Jul 2012 at 6:36