DEFINITION: b is an independent continuant = Def. b is a continuant which is
such that there is no c and no t such that b s-depends_on c at t. [017-002]
ELUCIDATION: b g-depends on c at t1 means: b exists at t1 and c exists at t1
& for some type B it holds that
(c instantiates B at t1)
& necessarily, for all t (if b exists at t then some instance_of B exists at t)
& not (b s-depends_on c at t1). [072-002]
Definition: b is a generically dependent continuant = Def. b is a continuant
that g-depends_on one or more other entities. [074-001]
Since we can have GDCs that at no time s-depend on something, such GDCs would
also be independent continuants, violating the intention of mutual disjointness
of siblings.
Barry proposes modifying the definition of independent continuant as follows:
b is a continuant which is such that there is no c and no t such that b
s-depends_on c at t and there is no d and no t such that b g-depends-on d at t.
I propose that we remove independent continuant from BFO. I will detail the
rationale in the next issue.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 24 Jul 2013 at 3:24
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
alanruttenberg@gmail.comon 24 Jul 2013 at 3:24