Check whether every Class and Property has a label and a comment

[mrnolte]

Hi there,
to make the ontology better understandable for external developers, we might want to make sure that every Class and Property both is labeled correctly and has an explanation. We could enforce that in the CI.

[mrnolte]

I went through every SOMA concept name and the following concepts either have no, or (in my opinion) insufficient, comments:

• Net Force
• Join limit
• Communication action - has to be revisited after the planned communication update
• Digital Resource - stems from IOLight and the axioms might just be missing
• Digital Data
• Digital object - the comment does not fit our recent discussions
• Dish
• Agent - needs an update according to our recent discussions
• Appliance - needs examples
• Functional Parts - Is every part of an agent / artifact a functional part?
• Head - the comment should be specified for robots and animals
• Finger - axiomatization and comment clash with "Prehensile effector"
• Room surface - Is this the Floor, the walls?
• Motion
• HeadMovement - there is a todo for Mihai. Probably forgot to remove that in the review process
• Walking - vs. Driving
• Contact State - what type of contact? Physical? Do they touch?
• Communication Task - has to be updated for the Communication Stuff
• Setpoint
• Action Execution Plan
• Reification - this one is tautological
• Affordance - cleanup the confusion between Disposition and Affordance and give an example of the pattern
• HasQualityRegion - has a todo
• Social relation
• Episode
• Quality Transition

[mrnolte]

Same for relations:

• affords concept - does not make the pattern clear
• involves artifact
• involves effector
• is event included in
• is action included in
• is object included in
• is agent included in
• is time included in
• is characterized by
• is agent involved in
• is artifact involved in
• is effector involved in
• includes part
• includes whole