Werner Ceusters

BS: "Wyoming is a fiat site" (stated in https://github.com/BFO-ontology/BFO-2020/issues/107#issuecomment-2407845411), BS: "There can be no fully fiat sites" (stated in https://github.com/BFO-ontology/BFO-2020/issues/107#issuecomment-2407431191) WC: it seems that a serious clean up of terminology...

> > Every site has or depends on a non-fiat boundary > > This is what I thought. But then "fiat object part" doesn't mean _fully fiat object part_. So...

1 and 3 are no problem, but I am not convinced about your analysis in 2. The GDC must exist in that case, i.e. concretized as an SDC on the...

@phismith So in each of the cases you mention, there is a particular x which instantiates GDC all the time when it exists, but gains parts by writing and playing....

@alanruttenberg I understand what you mean and see your point. But I am not sure you see yet all my points, though it seems that you agree that your point...

I'm glad you agree that the vegan axiom is inadequate.

Having as goal there to be a 1:1 relationship is not really a matter of ontology from a realist perspective, rather of representation. Personally, I don't see the need. But...

AR: > It's not a representation issue. It's a well-definedness issue. WC: That is too cryptic and requires further motivation. Simply on the above statement fatherhood is not well-defined because...

In an attempt (1) to better understand what your worry is in case processes of the type history would be allowed to be histories-of sites as well as of material-entities...

AR: > Lots of comments. I'll try to condense my take on this. WC: yes, but it would have been nice if you studied the comments and proposals a bit...