FIBOFTF — Issues with how Address Properties are represented

Terms_Agreement: I agree
First_Name: David
Last_Name: Newman
Email: david.newman@wellsfargo.com
Company: Wells Fargo Bank
CODE: OMG621
B1: Submit

Comments:

I do believe that FIBO Foundation ontologies are suitable for adoption as an OMG specification with the inclusion of the below recommendations.
1) PostalAddress should be represented with object properties moreso than data properties. City, country, postal region, etc. are things in their own right and not just strings. We can create FIBO class abstractions to support inclusion of user specified ontologies ( e.g. ISO3166, FAO, user devloped et.al) as subClasses
2) Address should be represented as a temporal relation, which is conceptually equivalent to the notion that addresses are 'things in a role'.
3) The objectProperty ëhasí is too generic and does not provide the level of expressivity needed when associated with Address as a range. Should be 'hasAddress'.
4) Replace the class UrbanCenter with PopulationCenter.

A more detailed set of RFC comments was later raised by David Newman.