Monohierarchy, disjointness, Subkinds of Material entity - 027-001

[GoogleCodeExporter]

"From this principle it follows that no two universals on the same level within 
an asserted hierarchy should have instances in common. "

However we discussed that there would be no assertion(or suggestion) of 
disjointness between object, fiat object part, and object aggregate. So this 
needs to be called out.

On this basis 027-001 seems to be amended in that it would seem to disallow at 
least some objects (ones that are not proper continuant parts of some other 
object) from being fiat object parts.

I don't see any obvious issue with the def of object aggregate but it should be 
checked. The easiest way would be to assert, in some test added to the CLIF, 
that there exists an entity that is both fiat object part and object, another 
that is object and object aggregate, and another that is fiat object part and 
object aggregate, and then see if an inconsistency is triggered.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 23 May 2012 at 5:31

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Current solution offered: No closure axioms. Disjoints among siblings except 
for children of material entity.

Original comment by alanruttenberg@gmail.com on 15 Jun 2012 at 4:43