domain and range of 'instant before' and 'instant after' seem too permissive

[avsculley]

A temporal instant t2 (a instance of a zero-dimensional temporal region) is after another temporal instant t1 iff there exists some instance of a temporal interval ti1 such that t1 is the starting instant of ti1 and t2 is the ending instant of ti1.

As is, this definition, and the domain-range restrictions of 'zero-dimensional temporal region,' seem to allow for a collection of separated temporal instants (a zero-dimensional temporal region that is not a temporal instant) to be either the starting instant or ending instant of a temporal interval. This can't be true.

I suggest that the parenthetical be removed from the definition and the domain-range restrictions be changed to 'temporal instant.'

The same reasoning holds for 'instant before.'

Edit: If you agree, I can make the changes.

[mark-jensen]

This raises a broader issue around improving and standardizing the format of definitions for relations in CCO.

Changing axioms requires a choice to be made about deprecation. Given that we about to mint v1.6, I think this should be pushed to v1.7 or 2.0.

@avsculley Will you scan trough the rest of the temporal relations and look for similar issues, documenting them here?

[avsculley]

I'm on it.

…

________________________________ From: Mark Jensen ***@***.***> Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2024 9:54 AM To: CommonCoreOntology/CommonCoreOntologies ***@***.***> Cc: Alec Sculley ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [CommonCoreOntology/CommonCoreOntologies] domain and range of 'instant before' and 'instant after' seem too permissive (Issue #480) This raises a broader issue around improving and standardizing the format of the definitions for the relations in CCO. Changing axioms requires a choice to be made about depreciation. Given that we about to mint v1.6, I think this should be pushed to v1.7 or 2.0. @avsculley<https://github.com/avsculley> Will you scan trough the rest of the temporal relations and look for similar issues, documenting them here? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#480 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ATJNTN3TRLWVEK3KDY5SZ73ZWWGQVAVCNFSM6AAAAABOG4LJ3SVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGNJRGYYDGOBVHA>. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[alanruttenberg]

There's a precedes/preceded-by relation in BFO that sounds like the same thing.

[swartik]

The elucidations for 'instant is before' and 'instant is after' define the properties in terms of 't1 precedes t2'. Is that plain English or a reference to the BFO property labeled 'precedes' that @alanruttenberg mentions?