search

zhengj2007 / bfo-export

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

Is material_part_of a relation? #33

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
"Thus we allow continuant_part_of to include such material-immaterial 
crossings, and recommend the use of the more specific relation of 
material_part_of where they need to be ruled out. "

However it isn't elsewhere defined in the document.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 21 May 2012 at 3:36

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I believe that we should create a wiki page also with proposed defined 
relations, recommended for reuse, an example being

a is_material_part_of b =Def. a part_of b and a is_a material entity

This is clearly not something to be defined by a domain ontology; but it is 
also, I believe, not something that should be included in BFO 2.0 documentation.

Original comment by ifo...@gmail.com on 22 May 2012 at 5:39