Boundary / Site¶
Local identifier:
xwkont:concept:boundary-siteSlug:boundary-siteEditorial status:reviewedCreated:2026-07-04Modified:2026-07-06
Scope Note¶
Selection rationale (per ADR-0018's admission bar): Boundary / Site is the eighth concept drafted from the 0.2.0 batch. Direct primary-source verification this session found a nameable category in 4 of 8 sources (BFO continuant fiat boundary/site/process boundary, GFO Material_boundary, TUpper edge/ridge/border/outer, and DOLCE feature — this last one not in TODO.md's original seed, a genuine addition). SUMO, UFO, YAMATO, and GUM were confirmed to have no reified boundary/site category. TUpper's claimed terms exist as real IRIs but, like space.md's MaterialObject/ShapedObject finding, are entirely undocumented — zero rdfs:comment or prose gloss anywhere in the fetched OWL artifact.
This crosswalk compares each source ontology's own treatment of dependent, boundary-like, or fiat-demarcated entities — mereotopological boundaries (edges, surfaces, points) and dependent places/regions (holes, sites) that exist only in virtue of a host entity, as distinct from Mereology/Parthood/Aggregate (already drafted, mereology-parthood-aggregate.md, which flagged BFO's fiat object part as directly relevant background for this crosswalk) and from Spatial Region/Space (already drafted, space.md, which covers extended regions rather than lower-dimensional dependent boundaries). Sources compared: BFO, DOLCE, SUMO, UFO, GFO, YAMATO, TUpper, GUM (per ADR-0015's 8-source scope).
Cross-cutting finding, established this session: BFO and DOLCE converge closely, despite using entirely different vocabulary, on a two-way split between part-of-host boundaries (BFO's fiat point/line/surface, demarcating a whole without being separately-existing material; DOLCE's relevant-part, "like a bump or an edge") and not-part-of-host dependent places (BFO's site, whose "boundaries... have locations determined in relation to some material entity"; DOLCE's dependent-place, "like a hole in a piece of cheese... or the shadow of a tree"). GFO's Material_boundary and BFO's process boundary each occupy a narrower, more specific niche (a boundary dependent on one specific material object; the durationless final/initial temporal part of a process, respectively) with no exact counterpart elsewhere. TUpper's edge/ridge/border/outer occupy a related mereotopological role (connected via in/part object properties to poly/point/surface/box) but cannot be compared in content to the other sources' definitions, since no prose gloss for any of them exists in either fetched TUpper artifact. See note-001, note-002.
Exclusions: this crosswalk does not address Mereology/Parthood/Aggregate (already drafted; BFO's fiat object part — a whole-dividing category distinct from this crosswalk's boundary-demarcating one — was flagged there as directly relevant background and is cross-referenced here, not re-litigated) or Spatial Region/Space (already drafted; BFO's own spatial region dimensional apparatus is the un-fiat-demarcated counterpart to this crosswalk's fiat boundaries).
Core.ttl placement is deliberately left open at this draft stage — see Uncertainty.
Labels, Alternate Labels, and Source Terminology¶
| Role | Label or term | Source | Language | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| XwkOnt working label | Boundary / Site | XwkOnt | en |
Not yet in data/ontology/core.ttl — see Scope Note. |
| Source term | Continuant fiat boundary (+ fiat point, fiat line, fiat surface, site, process boundary) | BFO | en |
Two structurally distinct families: continuant-side fiat boundaries (dimensional, part-of-host) and site (an immaterial entity, not a temporal part); process boundary is occurrent-side, structurally unrelated to the other two. |
| Source term | Feature (+ relevant-part, dependent-place) | DOLCE | en |
Not in TODO.md's original seed. A physical-endurant subtype, disjoint from amount-of-matter; near-exact structural match to BFO's part-of-host/not-part-of-host split. |
| Alternate label | (no class — see Uncertainty) | SUMO | en |
Zero occurrences of "Boundary," "Edge," or "Surface" as defined SUMO classes. |
| Alternate label | (no class — see Uncertainty) | UFO | en |
Zero occurrences of "boundary," "edge," or "surface" anywhere in the 2021 paper's full extracted text. |
| Source term | Material_boundary | GFO | en |
A Presential, Dependent on some Material_object; unglossed (structural axioms only, no prose definition) — the same undocumented-class pattern already found for GFO's Amount_of_substrate in quantity-amount-of-matter.md. |
| Alternate label | (no class — see Uncertainty) | YAMATO | en |
Zero occurrences of "boundary," "edge," "surface," or "site" in the extracted 2010 technical report. |
| Source term | Edge (+ ridge, border, outer) | TUpper | en |
Real IRIs in owl/tupper.all.owl, connected to poly/point/surface/box via in/part object properties — but entirely undocumented; zero rdfs:comment/prose anywhere in the fetched artifact. Confirms TODO.md's seed naming exactly, with this important documentation caveat added. |
| Alternate label | (no class — see Uncertainty) | GUM | en |
Zero occurrences of "Boundary," "Edge," "Surface," or "Site" as defined GUM classes. |
Source Definitions and Contextual Notes¶
| Source | Term or identifier | Dimension | Claim type | Definition, quotation, or paraphrase | Reference | Locator | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BFO | Continuant fiat boundary (BFO_0000140) | technical | direct quotation | "(Elucidation) A continuant fiat boundary b is an immaterial entity that is of zero, one or two dimensions & such that there is no time t when b has a spatial region as continuant part & whose location is determined in relation to some material entity." dc11:identifier "029-BFO". rdfs:subClassOf immaterial entity (BFO_0000141). |
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020 |
verified: bfo-core.ttl, class BFO_0000140, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
The parent class for fiat point/fiat line/fiat surface below; example list in the same block: "As for fiat point, fiat line, fiat surface." |
| BFO | Fiat point / fiat line / fiat surface (BFO_0000147 / BFO_0000142 / BFO_0000146) | technical | direct quotation | Fiat point: "a zero-dimensional continuant fiat boundary that consists of a single point" — e.g. "the geographic North Pole." Fiat line: "a one-dimensional continuant fiat boundary that is continuous" — e.g. "the Equator; all geopolitical boundaries." Fiat surface: "a two-dimensional continuant fiat boundary that is self-connected" — e.g. "the surface of the Earth." All three rdfs:subClassOf continuant fiat boundary (BFO_0000140). |
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020 |
verified: bfo-core.ttl, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
The direct structural analog to DOLCE's relevant-part ("a bump or an edge") — both denote a lower-dimensional entity that is a genuine (if non-natural, fiat-demarcated) part of its host, not a separately-existing dependent place. |
| BFO | Site (BFO_0000029) | technical | direct quotation | "(Elucidation) A site is a three-dimensional immaterial entity whose boundaries either (partially or wholly) coincide with the boundaries of one or more material entities or have locations determined in relation to some material entity." dc11:identifier "034-BFO". rdfs:subClassOf immaterial entity (BFO_0000141). |
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020 |
verified: bfo-core.ttl, class BFO_0000029, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 (already noted in space.md's BFO row as a related-but-distinct category, cross-referenced here as this crosswalk's primary subject) |
The direct structural analog to DOLCE's dependent-place ("a hole in a piece of cheese... the shadow of a tree") — both denote a three-dimensional (or otherwise extended) dependent region that is not a part of its host, only located relative to it. |
| BFO | Process boundary (BFO_0000035) | technical | direct quotation | "p is a process boundary =Def p is a temporal part of a process & p has no proper temporal parts." Example: "The boundary between the 2nd and 3rd year of your life." dc11:identifier "084-BFO". rdfs:subClassOf occurrent (BFO_0000003). |
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020 |
verified: bfo-core.ttl, class BFO_0000035, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
Occurrent-side, not continuant-side — structurally unrelated to continuant fiat boundary/site despite the shared English word "boundary." A citation-precision trap worth flagging explicitly: BFO uses "boundary" for two entirely different top-level categories (a durationless temporal part of a process, vs. a dimensionally-reduced dependent continuant), not one concept split two ways. |
| DOLCE | Feature (+ relevant-part, dependent-place) | technical | direct quotation | "Features are 'parasitic entities', that exist insofar their host exists. Typical examples of features are holes, bumps, boundaries, or spots of color. Features may be relevant parts of their host, like a bump or an edge, or dependent regions like a hole in a piece of cheese, the underneath of a table, the front of a house, or the shadow of a tree, which are not parts of their host. All features are essential wholes, but no common unity criterion may exist for all of them." rdfs:subClassOf physical-endurant; owl:disjointWith amount-of-matter; requires a host that is someValuesFrom physical-endurant. relevant-part: "Features that are relevant parts of their host, like a bump or an edge." dependent-place: "A feature that is not part of its host, like a hole in a piece of cheese, the underneath of a table, the front of a house, or the shadow of a tree." |
xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl |
verified: DOLCE-Lite.owl, classes #feature/#relevant-part/#dependent-place, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
Not part of TODO.md's original seed — a genuine addition, and the closest structural match to BFO's own boundary/site split found anywhere in this crosswalk: DOLCE's own worked example for relevant-part ("a bump or an edge") uses the identical English word BFO's fiat surface/fiat line examples evoke, and dependent-place's examples (hole, shadow) match BFO's site almost example-for-example. See note-001. |
| SUMO | (no class found) | technical | non-equivalence | Full-text grep of Merge.kif for (subclass Boundary ...), (subclass Edge ...), and (subclass Surface ...) returned zero matches; the only "surface" hit is an unrelated class, SurfaceChange ((subclass SurfaceChange InternalChange), a kind of process, not a boundary entity). |
xwkont:ref:sumo-niles-pease-2001 |
verified absence: current Merge.kif, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
Consistent with SUMO's general lack of BFO-style fiat-boundary/dependent-region machinery observed across this batch — SUMO's Region (space.md) already covers extended spatial regions but has no lower-dimensional/dependent-boundary counterpart. |
| UFO | (no class or property found) | technical | non-equivalence | Full-text search of the already-extracted 2021 Applied Ontology paper (9,048 lines) for "boundary," "edge," and "surface" (case-insensitive, word-boundary matched) returned zero matches for all three terms. | xwkont:ref:ufo-2021 |
verified absence: 2021 Applied Ontology paper, already-extracted text re-searched directly 2026-07-04 | The fourth 0.2.0-batch concept (after Situation, and partially Universal/Type's non-sortal categories) where UFO's 2021 comprehensive paper is silent on a category several other sources treat as foundational. |
| GFO | Material_boundary | technical | direct quotation | No rdfs:comment/skos:definition prose exists for this class in the fetched module — only structural axioms. rdfs:subClassOf both Dependent and Presential; requires depends_on some Material_object; owl:disjointWith Configuration, owl:disjointWith Material_object. |
xwkont:ref:gfo |
verified: modules/gfo-base.owl, class Material_boundary, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
The second GFO class in this 0.2.0 batch left without prose definition (after Amount_of_substrate in quantity-amount-of-matter.md) — GFO's own practice of relying entirely on structural position (superclasses, disjointWith, depends_on restrictions) rather than natural-language glosses for some classes is now a confirmed pattern across two concepts, not a one-off. Narrower in scope than BFO's continuant fiat boundary — dependent specifically on a Material_object, with no dimensional (point/line/surface) subdivision the way BFO has. |
| YAMATO | (no class found) | technical | non-equivalence | Full-text search of the extracted YAMATO 2010 technical report for "boundary," "edge," "surface," and "site" (case-insensitive) returned zero matches for all four terms. | xwkont:ref:yamato-mizoguchi-2010 |
verified absence: 2010 technical report, full extracted text re-searched directly 2026-07-04 | Not part of TODO.md's original seed for this concept; checked directly for completeness. |
| TUpper | Edge (+ ridge, border, outer) | technical | direct quotation | No rdfs:comment or prose gloss exists for edge, ridge, border, or outer anywhere in either fetched TUpper artifact (TUpper-Terms.html has zero occurrences of any of these four terms; owl/tupper.all.owl declares all four as bare Class IRIs with only structural SubClassOf/ObjectSomeValuesFrom axioms connecting them to poly, point, surface, and box via the in/part object properties — e.g. edge SubClassOf ObjectSomeValuesFrom(part, owl:Thing)). |
xwkont:ref:tupper-colore |
verified, undocumented: owl/tupper.all.owl, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04; confirmed absent from TUpper-Terms.html's prose |
Confirms TODO.md's seed naming exactly (edge, ridge, border, outer), but with an important correction: none of the four have any documented meaning in either fetched artifact — the same "real IRI, zero prose" pattern already found for TUpper's MaterialObject/ShapedObject in space.md. Their content cannot be compared to BFO's/DOLCE's/GFO's definitions, only their structural role (connected to poly/point/surface/box via in/part) can be noted. |
| GUM | (no class found) | technical | non-equivalence | Full-text grep of GUM-31.owl for #Boundary, #Edge, #Surface, and #Site (GUM's own PascalCase convention) returned zero matches. |
xwkont:ref:gum-owl |
verified absence: GUM-31.owl, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
The fourth 0.2.0-batch concept (after Situation, Universal/Type, and Mereology/Parthood/Aggregate) where GUM contributes nothing previously uncredited — GUM has now contributed new content in exactly half (4 of 8) of the 0.2.0-batch concepts drafted so far. |
Source Ontology Correspondences¶
| Correspondence ID | Source ontology | Source term | Source identifier or IRI | Source version | Reference | Inclusion rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
xwkont:correspondence:boundary-site:001 |
BFO | Continuant fiat boundary (+ fiat point, fiat line, fiat surface) | BFO_0000140, BFO_0000147, BFO_0000142, BFO_0000146 |
BFO 2020 (directly verified 2026-07-04) | xwkont:ref:bfo-2020 |
Direct terminological match; the part-of-host half of BFO's own boundary/site split. |
xwkont:correspondence:boundary-site:002 |
BFO | Site | BFO_0000029 |
BFO 2020 (directly verified 2026-07-04) | xwkont:ref:bfo-2020 |
Direct terminological match; the not-part-of-host half of BFO's own split. |
xwkont:correspondence:boundary-site:003 |
DOLCE | Feature (+ relevant-part, dependent-place) | http://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/DOLCE-Lite.owl#feature, #relevant-part, #dependent-place |
DOLCE-Lite v397 (directly verified 2026-07-04) | xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl |
Direct terminological and structural match; the closest cross-source pairing found in this crosswalk, per note-001. |
xwkont:correspondence:boundary-site:004 |
GFO | Material_boundary | https://w3id.org/gfo/base/Material_boundary |
GFO 2024-11-18 (directly verified 2026-07-04) | xwkont:ref:gfo |
Included despite lacking a prose definition; a narrower, single-material-object-dependent category. |
xwkont:correspondence:boundary-site:005 |
TUpper | Edge (+ ridge, border, outer) | not applicable — TUpper/PSL term names are their own identifiers | COLORE formalization, undated (directly verified 2026-07-04) | xwkont:ref:tupper-colore |
Included with an explicit documentation caveat — real IRIs, zero prose gloss in either fetched artifact. |
No SUMO, UFO, YAMATO, or GUM correspondence is recorded — see Source Definitions and Uncertainty.
Semantic Comparison Notes¶
| Note ID | Dimension | Claim type | Note | Supporting references | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
note-001 |
philosophical | editorial observation | BFO and DOLCE independently converge on the same two-way split despite entirely different vocabulary: a part-of-host boundary (BFO's dimensional fiat point/line/surface; DOLCE's relevant-part, worked example "a bump or an edge" — the identical word BFO's own fiat-surface/line examples evoke) versus a not-part-of-host dependent region (BFO's site; DOLCE's dependent-place, worked examples "a hole in a piece of cheese... the shadow of a tree," closely paralleling BFO's own site framing of a boundary "determined in relation to" a material entity without being part of it). This is the closest cross-source structural and even lexical convergence found in this crosswalk — stronger than the equivalent convergence found for Mereology/Parthood/Aggregate's two unity-strictness sub-patterns (mereology-parthood-aggregate.md's note-001). |
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020, xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl |
high |
note-002 |
technical | editorial observation | BFO uses the English word "boundary" for two structurally unrelated categories: continuant fiat boundary (a dimensionally-reduced, fiat-demarcated continuant, this crosswalk's main subject) and process boundary (a durationless temporal part of a process, an occurrent). These share no formal relationship in bfo-core.ttl beyond the word itself — a citation-precision trap of the same kind already found for YAMATO's "quantity" (quantity-amount-of-matter.md's note-002) and UFO's/GFO's "category" (universal-type.md's note-002), here occurring within a single source rather than across two. |
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020 |
high |
note-003 |
technical | editorial observation | GFO's Material_boundary and TUpper's edge/ridge/border/outer are the second and third instances in this 0.2.0 batch of a source contributing a real, structurally-positioned class or IRI with zero natural-language definition anywhere in the fetched primary artifact (after GFO's own Amount_of_substrate in quantity-amount-of-matter.md, and TUpper's own MaterialObject/ShapedObject in space.md). This is now a confirmed recurring pattern for both sources specifically, not a one-off gap — worth treating as an expected, not exceptional, finding in any future crosswalk that reaches GFO's or TUpper's less-central classes. |
xwkont:ref:gfo, xwkont:ref:tupper-colore |
high |
Mapping Assertions or Candidate Relations¶
| Mapping ID | Subject | Relation category | Object | predicate_id |
mapping_justification |
Status | Confidence | Rationale | Provenance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
xwkont:mapping:boundary-site:001 |
BFO:Fiat surface (+ fiat line) | close-match |
DOLCE:Relevant-part | skos:closeMatch |
semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | high | Both denote a lower-dimensional, non-natural-boundary part of a host that remains genuinely part of that host — DOLCE's own worked example ("a bump or an edge") uses the same vocabulary BFO's fiat-surface/line examples evoke. The closest lexical and structural pairing in this crosswalk. | xwkont:ref:bfo-2020, xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl |
xwkont:mapping:boundary-site:002 |
BFO:Site | close-match |
DOLCE:Dependent-place | skos:closeMatch |
semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | high | Both denote a dependent region whose location is fixed relative to a material/physical entity without being a part of it — BFO's "boundaries... have locations determined in relation to some material entity" and DOLCE's "a hole in a piece of cheese... the shadow of a tree" describe the same not-part-of-host dependent-region pattern. | xwkont:ref:bfo-2020, xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl |
xwkont:mapping:boundary-site:003 |
BFO:Continuant fiat boundary | overlap |
GFO:Material_boundary | none | semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | low-medium | Both denote a boundary dependent on a material entity, but GFO's has no dimensional (point/line/surface) subdivision the way BFO's does — overlap, not close-match, reflects this structural asymmetry, confidently established from GFO's own class hierarchy. low-medium, not a plain value, specifically because GFO's own file also lacks a prose definition to compare against BFO's detailed gloss — a genuine sourcing-completeness gap in the primary source, not an additional substantive divergence. |
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020, xwkont:ref:gfo |
xwkont:mapping:boundary-site:004 |
BFO:Fiat point/line/surface | unknown |
TUpper:edge/ridge/border/outer | none | semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | low | Recorded explicitly as an unresolved comparison, not a correspondence — TUpper's terms have no prose definition anywhere fetched, so whether they denote the same part-of-host boundary concept as BFO's dimensional fiat classes cannot currently be verified beyond their shared structural role (connection to poly/point/surface via in/part). |
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020, xwkont:ref:tupper-colore |
xwkont:mapping:boundary-site:005 |
xwkont-core:Boundary (candidate) | unknown |
SUMO | none | semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | low | No SUMO correspondence identified; zero occurrences of "Boundary"/"Edge"/"Surface" as defined SUMO classes. | xwkont:ref:sumo-niles-pease-2001 |
xwkont:mapping:boundary-site:006 |
xwkont-core:Boundary (candidate) | unknown |
UFO | none | semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | low | No UFO correspondence identified; zero occurrences of "boundary"/"edge"/"surface" in the 2021 paper's full extracted text. | xwkont:ref:ufo-2021 |
xwkont:mapping:boundary-site:007 |
xwkont-core:Boundary (candidate) | unknown |
YAMATO | none | semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | low | No YAMATO correspondence identified; zero occurrences of "boundary"/"edge"/"surface"/"site" in the extracted technical report. | xwkont:ref:yamato-mizoguchi-2010 |
xwkont:mapping:boundary-site:008 |
xwkont-core:Boundary (candidate) | unknown |
GUM | none | semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | low | No GUM correspondence identified; zero occurrences of "Boundary"/"Edge"/"Surface"/"Site" as defined GUM classes. | xwkont:ref:gum-owl |
Uncertainty, Non-Equivalence, and Open Questions¶
| Item ID | Type | Description | Impact | Follow-up |
|---|---|---|---|---|
uncertainty-001 |
open-question | Where should xwkont-core:Boundary/Site subclass from once added to data/ontology/core.ttl? BFO's and DOLCE's converging two-way split (part-of-host boundary vs. not-part-of-host dependent place, note-001) is the strongest evidence in this crosswalk, but GFO's and TUpper's contributions are narrower/less-documented and don't clearly map onto either half of that split without further sourcing. Recommendation recorded 2026-07-04, in response to external review: model both halves explicitly as two sibling sub-concepts — a part-of-host Boundary (BFO fiat point/line/surface, DOLCE relevant-part) and a not-part-of-host dependent Site/Place (BFO site, DOLCE dependent-place) — rather than one undifferentiated class, since note-001 is this crosswalk's strongest and most convergent finding and a single class would lose that distinction. GFO's Material_boundary and TUpper's undocumented edge/ridge/border/outer don't clearly map onto either half yet (uncertainty-003) and shouldn't block adopting the two-sub-concept structure for the BFO/DOLCE core. This mirrors the same two-sub-concept resolution recorded for mereology-parthood-aggregate.md's own uncertainty-002 (strict Aggregate vs. permissive Sum) — both are cases in this batch where the strongest evidence is a real two-way split, not a single converging class. |
Blocks final core.ttl placement; does not block continuing this crosswalk's research/review. Recorded recommendation resolves the "decide two-subconcept model" item flagged by the 2026-07-04 external review. | Confirm or override this recommendation at review time, jointly with mereology-parthood-aggregate.md's own two-sub-concept recommendation. |
uncertainty-002 |
non-equivalence | BFO's process boundary (occurrent-side) and continuant fiat boundary (continuant-side) share only the English word "boundary," not any formal relationship — see note-002. This crosswalk's own correspondences (correspondence-001/002) are built entirely on the continuant-side family; process boundary is recorded here only as a citation-precision flag, not as part of this concept's own cross-source comparison. |
Prevents a future reader from conflating BFO's two "boundary"-named categories when consulting this crosswalk. | None outstanding; recorded here and in note-002 for traceability. |
uncertainty-003 |
non-equivalence | TUpper's edge/ridge/border/outer have no prose definition anywhere in either fetched artifact (TUpper-Terms.html or owl/tupper.all.owl) — their comparison to BFO's/DOLCE's definitions (mapping-004) rests only on structural role (connection to poly/point/surface/box via in/part), not on any confirmed shared meaning. |
This crosswalk's TUpper correspondence (correspondence-005) is the least well-evidenced of the four recorded. |
Re-check if TUpper's tupper.clif file (not yet fetched in this pass, per space.md's own equivalent follow-up for MaterialObject/ShapedObject) contains axioms or comments clarifying these four terms' intended meaning. |
Provenance and References¶
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020— Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) 2020 / ISO/IEC 21838-2:2021 — verified directly againstbfo-core.ttl, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl— DOLCE-Lite OWL translation — verified directly againstDOLCE-Lite.owl, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:sumo-niles-pease-2001— Towards a Standard Upper Ontology (Niles & Pease, 2001) — verified absence directly against current SUMOMerge.kif, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:ufo-2021— UFO: Unified Foundational Ontology (Guizzardi et al., 2021) — verified absence directly (full-text re-search), 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:gfo— General Formal Ontology (GFO) — verified, unglossed directly againstmodules/gfo-base.owl, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:yamato-mizoguchi-2010— YAMATO 2010 technical report (Mizoguchi) — verified absence directly against the extracted PDF, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:tupper-colore— TUpper COLORE formalization (Grüninger) — verified, undocumented directly againstowl/tupper.all.owlandTUpper-Terms.html, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:gum-owl— GUM 3.1 OWL (Bateman) — verified absence directly againstGUM-31.owl, 2026-07-04
Review History¶
| Review ID | Date | Outcome | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| — | 2026-07-04 | Not yet reviewed — draft |
Eighth concept of the 0.2.0 batch (ADR-0018), following time.md through mereology-parthood-aggregate.md. All 8 sources checked directly against primary artifacts already cached from prior crosswalks' research. Found the strongest cross-source structural convergence of any 0.2.0-batch concept so far (BFO/DOLCE's matching part-of-host/not-part-of-host split, note-001) alongside a genuine within-source citation trap (BFO's two unrelated "boundary" categories, note-002) and a confirmed recurring documentation gap for GFO and TUpper (note-003, now observed across two concepts each). DOLCE's feature apparatus, not in the original seed, turned out to be this crosswalk's strongest correspondence. SUMO, UFO, YAMATO, and GUM confirmed to have no reified boundary/site category. Pending maintainer review before advancing to reviewed; core.ttl placement (uncertainty-001) is an open question to resolve at that review. |
xwkont:review:boundary-site:2026-07-05:01 |
2026-07-05 | Passed — advanced draft → reviewed |
Checked against docs/governance/contributing.md's Review Checklist: scope preserved; every xwkont:ref:* citation resolves; correspondence/mapping/note/uncertainty ID numbering sequential (correspondences 001-005, mappings 001-008, notes 001-003, uncertainty 001-003); all confidence values within the ADR-0013 vocabulary. Clarified (2026-07-06, full-corpus audit): mapping-003's rationale originally bundled a structural/substantive reason (GFO lacks BFO's dimensional subdivision) with a sourcing-completeness reason (GFO lacks a prose definition) under one low-medium confidence value. Separated for precision: the structural asymmetry confidently justifies the overlap category itself; only the documentation gap justifies the low-medium confidence hedge, per docs/methodology/crosswalk-runbook.md's governing principle. The confidence value and category are unchanged; only the rationale's precision improved. The TUpper weak-evidence caveat confirmed kept honest throughout (no confidence inflation). Confirmed the uncertainty-001 two-sub-concept recommendation: part-of-host Boundary (BFO fiat point/line/surface; DOLCE relevant-part) and not-part-of-host Site/Place (BFO site; DOLCE dependent-place) will be modeled as sibling sub-concepts — the strongest structural convergence found in the batch (BFO/DOLCE independently agreeing via different vocabulary) makes this the clearest of this batch's two two-sub-concept calls, alongside mereology-parthood-aggregate.md's analogous split. This confirmation is a recorded modeling decision, not a core.ttl edit; that Turtle-change work remains separately tracked. Self-review, not independent third-party review. |
Future Work¶
- ~~Confirm or override the
uncertainty-001two-sub-concept recommendation~~ — done 2026-07-05: confirmed (xwkont:review:boundary-site:2026-07-05:01); advanceddraft→reviewed. Thecore.ttladdition of both sibling classes remains separately-tracked Turtle-change work. - Re-check TUpper's
tupper.cliffile for clarifying axioms onedge/ridge/border/outer(uncertainty-003). - ~~Create the Proposition/Content crosswalk next~~ — done (
proposition-content.mdreviewed). Was the ninth and final concept of this batch.