What do you mean “which one is it”?
It’s both. It’s approaching the event from both perception and interaction and explaining the differences.
They didn’t do it. The ontology I’m presenting did. Along with many other things. Some of which are listed in my comment above.
Those results were byproducts. The goal was to produce a functional foundational ontology accessible to anyone. The intuitive, practical terms ensure accessibility and the details expressed above illustrate its functionality.
How often does someone present a foundational ontology? A complete, coherent philosophy? Not very often.