Issue 12 in bfo: immaterial parts and MaterialEntity

[b...@googlecode.com]

Status: New
Owner: ----
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium

New issue 12 by batchel...@rsc.org: immaterial parts and MaterialEntity
http://code.google.com/p/bfo/issues/detail?id=12

Hello,

This is not a problem with BFO as such, but something to bear in mind in
the presentation.

Objects and FiatObjectParts at least may (and possibly must) have
immaterial parts such as cavities, hollows and tunnels. I'm not sure about
whether the space in between penguins in a huddle counts as an immaterial
part of that ObjectAggregate, but that ObjectAggregate definitely has
immaterial parts inside and on the surface of the penguins.

Calling the parent of these three MaterialEntity does make it sound as if
they don't include the immaterial parts.

Also, whereas process--result polysemy (examples: infection, distribution)
relates an occurrent and a continuant, figure--ground polysemy (examples:
door, gate, conduit, tunnel) relates the whole and an immaterial part in a
rather more complicated way. I'm happy with the inside of a fireplace or a
blood vessel being a Site, but it seems less obvious that a door (in the
sense of walking through a door with a pout as opposed to walking through a
door with a crash and splintering wood) is a Site.

Where do immaterial parts that aren't Sites go?

Best wishes,
Colin.

--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue.
You may adjust your issue notification preferences at:
http://code.google.com/hosting/settings

[b...@googlecode.com]

Comment #1 on issue 12 by alanruttenberg: immaterial parts and
MaterialEntity
http://code.google.com/p/bfo/issues/detail?id=12

"Calling the parent of these three MaterialEntity does make it sound as if

they don't include the immaterial
parts."

I think the whole of a MaterialEntity must have material parts, so it's not
that problematic to keep the same.
We don't assert anywhere that all parts of material entities are material
entities.

I don't know if Sites are intended to be a subtype of immaterial entity. I
thought it should be considered a
synonym, but if Barry disagrees then we need to add immaterial entity as a
parent to it.

(response to other parts of your comment deliberately blank - don't have
time now)

[b...@googlecode.com]

Comment #2 on issue 12 by batchel...@rsc.org: immaterial parts and
MaterialEntity
http://code.google.com/p/bfo/issues/detail?id=12

Alan Ruttenberg says:

> We don't assert anywhere that all parts of material entities are material
> entities.

True. I think it would help to say explicitly that holes, which are
immaterial, are
allowed to be parts of material entities. My sense is that, in this sort
of case,
people don't trust their intuition that holes are actually there and are
countable,
causes things, and so forth.

(Sites are partly material as well as immaterial, or at least they were
when I last
looked.)

Best wishes,
Colin.

[b...@googlecode.com]

Comment #3 on issue 12 by alanruttenberg: immaterial parts and
MaterialEntity
http://code.google.com/p/bfo/issues/detail?id=12

Agreed on documentation. Regarding sites, I have conflicting information
from conversations with Barry. Needs
to be clarified.

[b...@googlecode.com]

Updates:
Status: Started
Owner: janna.ha...@gmail.com
Cc: batch...@rsc.org

Comment #4 on issue 12 by janna.ha...@gmail.com: immaterial parts and
MaterialEntity
http://code.google.com/p/bfo/issues/detail?id=12

Colin, can you verify that the current BFO 2 inclusion of 'immaterial
entity' and corresponding axiomatization solves this issue?

[b...@googlecode.com]

Comment #5 on issue 12 by batch...@rsc.org: immaterial parts and
MaterialEntity
http://code.google.com/p/bfo/issues/detail?id=12

OK, happy that this allows us to have immaterial parts that aren't
necessarily sites.

[b...@googlecode.com]

Updates:
Labels: -Type-Defect Type-BFO2-Reference

Comment #6 on issue 12 by alanrut...@gmail.com: immaterial parts and
MaterialEntity
http://code.google.com/p/bfo/issues/detail?id=12

(No comment was entered for this change.)