Align somehow with PATO?

[drseb]

I haven't thought this through, but should this:

biological-spatial-ontology/bspo.obo

Line 1824 in f30f21b

id: opposite_to

be aligned with PATO: https://github.com/pato-ontology/pato/blob/4a927026b5fac9d2809c1eee3be39a9e9284c1dd/pato.obo#L1741

I assume here it is a class, and the other is a property, but just wanted to raise awareness. Feel free to just close if nonsense

[teleaslamellatus]

@cmungall

Was this issue solved or closed?

There are some PATO classes that do not have corresponding object properties in BSPO:

medial to http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/PATO_0001191

lateral to http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/PATO_0001193

proximal to http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/PATO_0001195

distal to http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/PATO_0001234

These are, I think, as important as anterior to or posterior to.

Thanks!

[ramonawalls]

I can add these classes in BSPO. Not sure what it means to align them with PATO, though. Is it just a matter of adding XREFs?

[matentzn]

I think just informally: for all the positional and relational qualities to have a relationship in BSPO.. I would just add these ones here and then close.

[teleaslamellatus]

Thanks, I am already using them!

[balhoff]

Just a comment on the original question about 'opposite to'—I don't think there is much to be aligned between the BSPO property and the PATO property. The BSPO one is a spatial relationship and the PATO one has to do with meaning. Also the BSPO one is an ordinary relation between instances and the PATO is more at the type level.

[drseb]

Ok. Then let’s just close?!

[teleaslamellatus]

Oops, how 'opposite to' and 'contralateral to' (child of opposite to') differ from each other?

[balhoff]

Oops, how 'opposite to' and 'contralateral to' (child of opposite to') differ from each other?

'contralateral to' is opposite across a specific axis.

[ramonawalls]

Ok. Then let’s just close?!

I think the issue should remain open, because there are other PATO classes we should align to.