zhengj2007
commented
9 years ago From cmung...@gmail.com on November 26, 2012 10:55:47
I'm not sure the onus is on me to write a document (I've already brought this up on the bfo owl list with no resolution). I think the documentation needs to be on the BFO2 owl side.
The release notes are a good start, but the status of non-rigid classes are not clear. Let's say I want to start developing an ontology that includes classes such as "human with Parkinson's disease" or "infected lung". Are these non-rigid classes forbidden with BFO2? Can I go ahead and add them to my ontology, even though BFO2 owl says they are uninstantiable? Do I have guarantees that I will not be forced to change my model at some future date? And what about situations such as nucleus and cell? Do I just go ahead and use part_of_at_all_times and add an annotation that this is actually false? And if I do this do I have guarantees I will not have to change my model further down the line?
From mcour...@gmail.com on November 26, 2012 13:30:11
from Chris: "I don't think Graz is ready yet. The status of non-rigid classes is still very unclear, there needs to be more documentation here. I can discuss more on the BFO call today."
from Alan: "Chris can you write up a document that explains what the issue with nonrigid classes and exactly how it impacts the work you do? If we are going to solve this issue we need a target that we agree on"
thread at https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups=#!topic/obo-operations-committee/4ZrPc1NB7ds
Original issue: http://code.google.com/p/bfo/issues/detail?id=132