P.S.: @AlexU75: I think there is something wrong with the line endings settings, I keep getting Windows line endings when checking out files from your computer, but this does not seem happen when I check out files from other Windows users.

What is the status here? As an outsider who has some GFO knowledge it is very helpful to have a GFO-light variant around.

@k00ni Thank you for your comments and interest in GFO-light!

What is the status here?

The first version is almost finished. A paper is in preparation. Minor changes/adjustments may still be made in this context.

Why introducing the new RDF content in a different serialization (RDF/Turtle)?

Simply for better readability.

The following sentence is a circular definition: Material continuants are individual 3-dimensional material objects.

The sentence Material continuants are individual 3-dimensional material objects (e.g., a person, a computer, a chopstick or a football stadium), material aggregates (groups) of objects that together form a unit (e.g., a research group at a university or a sports team) or material parts that have no natural boundary with the whole material object (e.g., part of a bone or of a chopstick). is to be understood as follows. Material continuants subsume material objects, material aggregates and material parts.

Having played around with gfo-light.ttl for a while I wonder why introducing a new namespace?

• gfo-base: https://w3id.org/gfo/base
• gfo-light: https://w3id.org/gfo/light 🆕

Isn't gfo-light just a "sub graph" of gfo-base? To me it always appeared that you only picked a few classes, properties and axioms from gfo-base and bundled it to gfo-light.

Developing with gfo-light might be "easier", because there is less stuff and its more clear but what do I do when I want to use stuff from gfo-base? Do I have to replace my namespace or are there even more changes behind the scenes I have to be aware of?

Doesn't this also lead to the situation that additions/changes require the adoption of at least two files (gfo-base.owl, gfo-light.ttl)?

GFO-light corresponds to GFO v2, while GFO-base belongs to the old GFO v1 version. GFO (full) v2 is also in progress, and there are already some publications on it. It is not recommended to mix the two versions, as there are some conceptual differences between them.

Thanks for the clarification. I know a bit about GFO v1 and v2, but these information are nowhere to be found in the metadata.

Instead I have date-based version information such as:

• owl:versionIRI <https://w3id.org/gfo/light/release/2024-08-29> ; (gfo-light, ref)
• <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="https://w3id.org/gfo/base/release/2024-11-18"/> (gfo-base, ref)

It would indeed be very helpful if you could use a version scheme such as Semantic Versioning. This would make it clear which major version I, as a user/consument, am using. Another way could be providing further metadata "behind" the version URI (such as https://w3id.org/gfo/light/release/2024-08-29). One could "ask" it and retrieves more detailed version information. But this seems overkill in this regard.

Besides, expecting people to know the related papers is a bit short-sighted, because there is no register/curated list of them. They are spread over the internet. Especially folks that you are targeting with gfo-light, such as developers, knowledge engineers etc. might not so familiar with these.

Isn't gfo-light just a "sub graph" of gfo-base? To me it always appeared that you only picked a few classes, properties and axioms from gfo-base and bundled it to gfo-light.

As far as I know, GFO light is not exactly a subset of GFO. There may be cases where class definitions have been changed or axioms simplified. Perhaps @AlexU75 can shed more light on this.

It would indeed be very helpful if you could use a version scheme such as Semantic Versioning.

We discussed this internally. Personally, I also prefer semantic versioning, but the decision was to use date-based version numbers.

Besides, expecting people to know the related papers is a bit short-sighted, because there is no register/curated list of them.

+1

Thanks for your input, @k00ni!