Body Mass Index label

[ddooley]

Could the term label for "Body Mass Index" be modified to have " stressor" or "exposure receptor" on the end? At moment it is mixing with search results for BMI that are information content entities. (Ultimately OBOFoundry should only have one "Body Mass Index", but that will require changes in other quarters).

The definition above conveys an information content entity but if that is the intent, then reuse a BMI ICE instead? But in that case it wouldn't fit in the hierarchy where it is now, under "human population" or "biosphere" - or perhaps change those terms to include "stressor" in them too? We need to eliminate confusing term search results.

[cjgrondin]

@ddooley relabeling the term body mass index requires further discussion since 'stressor' indicates strain or tension in a system and body mass index as an influencing factor does not necessarily indicate it is causing strain or tension in the system

[ddooley]

Reading from the top down, I'm realizing that the names of things in this ontology are meant to be taken from the top level class semantic implicitly. Personally, I feel like that should be made explicit, so as not to collide with the more generic names of those things occurring in ontology lookup services; a shorthand synonym could be given for brevity. e.g.

exposure_receptor
    human individual as exposure receptor
       human individual by attribute as exposure receptor
    human population as exposure receptor (i.e. 'has role' some 'exposure receptor role')

But at moment "human individual" is shown as a subclass of "human population" as well, which needs to be fixed, esp. if "human population" is ever defined as "has member" > 1 individual.

Also both "human individual" and "human population" have subclass "human attribute". That would cause problems as things like "age" would be taken to be a kind of "human individual", and a kind of "human population". Perhaps attributes could be connected by "has characteristic" instead?