I am fairly sure the property chain declarations in the current BFO2 ontology
are incomplete.
E.g. I think there should be
* InverseOf(continuant-part-of-at-all-times) o has-continuant-part-at-some-time -> has-continuant-part-at-some-time
This is equivalent to writing
* has-continuant-part-at-all-times-that-part-exists o
has-continuant-part-at-some-times -> has-continuant-part-at-some-times
I have not yet managed to generate a proof of this. My attempts so far are in
the examples/property-chains/ directory.
It would be good if there were some kind of annotation assertion that allowed
us to know if the OP was considered "done" - i.e. absence of an axiom is
deliberate rather than error of omission.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by cmung...@gmail.com on 17 Mar 2013 at 6:16
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
cmung...@gmail.comon 17 Mar 2013 at 6:16