- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 23:18:34 -0400
- To: samwald@gmx.at
- Cc: Eric.Jain@isb-sib.ch, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
On May 18, 2007, at 1:03 PM, samwald@gmx.at wrote: > The specific difficulties with the location of objects and > processes are to some degree inherent in the current OWL versions > of BFO and the Relation Ontology. They make it a bit difficult to > create statements that relate processes to certain locations and > force you to make statements about the participants of the process > instead. Could you elaborate on this? My understanding is that according to BFO, pretty much everything about a process is determined by the participants (the process is existentially dependent on the participants). Although I recently noticed what I consider an oddity in the Relations in Biomedical Ontologies paper : c exists_at t = [definition] for some p, p has_participant c at t, which would seem to make the process primary.(I'm not actually sure why this predicate is needed if we already have instance_of) -Alan
Received on Wednesday, 30 May 2007 03:18:36 UTC