While inspecting the BFO current examples of usage, I came across the
following:
epidemic as example of usage for Material.
I presume this may stem from the reasoning that epidemic may be understood as
'a wave of disease' and since several 'example of usage' relate to some sort of
'wave' (energy wave, sea wave), the term may have been dumped there but it does
not feel right.
As a side note, Infectious Disease Ontology (which uses BFO1.1) cast 'infection
disease epidemic' as a process with the following definition: "A process of
infectious disease realizations and for which there is a statistically
significant increase in the infectious disease incidence of a population."
Either this particular is incorrect and should be removed or it should be
documented further, expanding on the reason (maybe because casting epidemic as
material or storm as material allows those things to bear qualities)
BFO should have the rule that for any example of usage, a subtype could be
directly asserted under the class it is suppose to illustrate. "epidemic is_a
material entity', 'tornado is_a material entity', hurricane is_a material
entity'
Philippe
Original issue reported on code.google.com by proccase...@gmail.com on 29 Jan 2013 at 6:12
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
proccase...@gmail.com
on 29 Jan 2013 at 6:12