'is part of' is not transitive about bfo HOT 6 CLOSED

From [email protected] on June 28, 2011 08:16:10

Reported by [email protected], Jun 24 (4 days ago)

The 'is part of' object property and its SubProperty 'is physical part of' do not > have the property characteristic - transitive. Please fix this!

Clairification:

• this comment refers to the version of BFO found using http://purl.obolibrary.obo/bfo.owl , which resolves to: http://bfo.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/src/ontology/bfo2.owl Older versions may be better in some respects, but do not have the Foundry compliant BFO ids I need.

Also - I'm posting this on the BFO google code tracker https://code.google.com/p/bfo/issues/detail?id=16 . I would prefer answers on this tracker ticket rather than on BFO discuss - or whatever other mailing list this might be forwarded to.

Cheers,

David O-S

from bfo.

From [email protected] on June 28, 2011 08:38:48

Not to object but just wondering what breaks in the absence of an explicit typing.

by http://bfo.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/src/ontology/bfo2-relations.owl is_part_of seems to be an inverse of has_part which is transitive, isn't it enough?

true the physical variant doesn't seem to be know transitive

from bfo.

From [email protected] on June 28, 2011 08:45:05

is_part_of seems to be an inverse of has_part which is transitive, isn't it enough?

It's enough for ontologies that import both relations. But some may not, so better, I think, to be explicit.

from bfo.

From [email protected] on June 28, 2011 08:50:37

not trying to be thick nor antagonising, but wouldn't ontologies simply import the whole of BFO ?

from bfo.

From [email protected] on April 29, 2012 02:09:17

'is part of' is transitive in current working version of BFO 2 in OWL

Status: Done
Owner: [email protected]

from bfo.

From [email protected] on May 01, 2012 01:08:47

Pierre, no, it is possible to import just a portion of BFO and I concur with David that therefore having the explicit assertion is of benefit.

However: I have change the status of this issue back to 'started' pending a decision process for making closure decisions.
"current working version of BFO 2 in OWL" is non-referring.
Intended referent is, I believe, https://code.google.com/p/bfo/source/browse/trunk/src/ontology/owl-schulz/bfo.owl r215

from bfo.