search

zhengj2007 / bfo-export

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

Histories and course_of relation #43

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Again we have a theory that has been reasonably well developed, without having 
either technical or ontological disagreement  - a 1:1 correspondence between 
occurrents and continuants. We need these terms in order to do a reasonable job 
in dealing with development and other temporal phenomena.

If not, remove them from the spec. The spec is long already and suffers for 
including topics that don't actually contribute to BFO2.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 23 May 2012 at 2:05

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
What about "slices" of histories, e.g. my life during the year 2009

Original comment by steschu@gmail.com on 15 Jun 2012 at 4:51

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
These are in BFO2 reference and are in the OWL file. History is a subclass of 
Process. It looks like is-course-of and has-course were allocated URIs but then 
history-of and has-history were given new URIs, so we should re-use the 
course-of and has-course URIs.

I am fixing this in the bfo specification source and then closing this issue. I 
will open a new issue to deal with Stefan's question.

Original comment by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 30 Apr 2013 at 3:48

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 30 Apr 2013 at 3:50