SBVR11 — SBVR Issue : Inconsistent use/definition of keyword 'or'

Title: Inconsistent use/definition of keyword 'or'
Spec: SBVR
Version: 1.0

Source: Ed Barkmeyer, NIST, edbark@nist.gov

Summary:

In clause 9.2.1, p.52, 'bindable target' is defined as:
variable, expression or individual concept
In clause 11.1.5, 'contextualization fact type' is defined as:
is-role-of fact-type or is-facet-of fact-type
In clause 11.1.5, 'contextualized concept' is defined as:
role or facet
At the end of section C.3.2.1 in Annex C, the example is:
contextualized concept
Definition: role or facet
In Annex E, p.327, 'fuel level' is defined as:
full or 7/8 or 3/4 or 5/8 or 1/2 or 3/8 or 1/4 or 1/8 or empty

In all these, 'or' is stylized as a keyword. According to Annex C.3.2.1, these represent extensional definitions, i.e., the unions of the extensions of the concepts. But according to Annex C.1.1, the
keyword 'or' is defined to mean logical disjunction between two
propositions. So the definition of keyword 'or' is inconsistent with the usages.

One solution is to change the definitions.
E.g., for contextualized concept:
Definition: concept that is a role or is a facet
This form has a direct translation to the concepts in Clause 9.

An alternative is to change the meaning of the keyword in C.1.1, assuming it is never used for logical disjunction of propositions.
Another alternative is to introduce a new keyword.

Clarify the example at the end of C.3.2.1