Hajo Rijgersberg has alerted me to the UOM
described and available at the following URL: http://www.atoapps.nl/foodinformatics/index.asp
Regards
Geoff
Williams x7411
Programme Manager,
Business Process Improvement Standards
From:
uom-ontology-std-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:uom-ontology-std-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rijgersberg, Hajo
Sent: 14 July 2009 16:13
To: uom-ontology-std
Subject: Re: [uom-ontology-std]
UoM ontology standard - a proposed program ofwork
Het is eigenlijk jammer voor ze dat onze
paper zo lang is tegengehouden. Had ze een nu een hoop werk kunnen besparen!
Bovendien kijken ze niet naar bestaande aanpakken. Misschien moet jij als prof
hier eens een punt van maken? Kijk maar of je het ziet zitten.
Van:
uom-ontology-std-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx namens Geoff
Williams
Verzonden: di 14-7-2009 16:35
Aan: uom-ontology-std
Onderwerp: Re: [uom-ontology-std]
UoM ontology standard - a proposed program ofwork
David Leal says
>>>>>
<Aside>
Evan uses the term "quantity value" which is defined within the VIM.
I have
read the definition many times: "number and reference together expressing
magnitude of a quantity". I think that this phrase should be read as
follows:
number_and_reference_together - expressing_magnitude_of - a_quantity
but it could be read as:
number_and_reference_together - expressing - magnitude_of_a_quantity
Hence is the thing identified by (or "expressed by") 2.54 cm a
"quantity" or
a "magnitude_of_a_quantity"? Somebody must know, or is there a
deliberate
ambiguity. :)
</Aside> >>>>>>>>>>>
[GW] Nobody seems to have picked this comment up. I am concerned
that there is a misunderstanding here. My understanding of the VIM
definition of _quantity_value_ is based on the following:
_Quantity_ is defined by 1.1 of VIM (JCGM 200:2008 = ISO/IEC Guide 99:2007) http://www.bipm.org/en/publications/guides/vim.html
See also definition of (physical) quantity in Electropedia (http://www.electropedia.org ) section
111.11.01
Electropedia is an online searchable database version of the International
Electrotechnical Vocabulary, IEC 60050
Definition 1.19 of VIM (JCGM 200:2008 = ISO/IEC Guide 99:2007) defines
_quantity _value_ (or _value_of_quantity or _value_) and I am certain in my own
mind that the term means "magnitude_of_a_quantity" not
"quantity"
In David's example the quantity is a length and the magnitude is 2.54 cm ie
expressed as a number and reference (unit).
I can seek clarification of this interpretation from JCGM/WG 2 if this is a
contentious issue
Regards
Geoffrey Williams
Programme Manager,
Business Process Improvement Standards
Standards Operations
_____________________________
BSI, 389 Chiswick High Road, London,
W4 4AL, UK
Tel: +44 (0)20 8996 7411
Fax: +44(0)20 8996 7249
email: geoff.williams@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Web: www.bsigroup.com
P Please consider the environment before printing this email
-----Original Message-----
From: uom-ontology-std-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:uom-ontology-std-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of David Leal
Sent: 10 July 2009 22:20
To: uom-ontology-std
Subject: Re: [uom-ontology-std] UoM ontology standard - a proposed program
ofwork
Dear All,
I strongly support Ed's proposed approach, and especially his reference to
the VIM:
> We should extract the UoM parts of these
ontologies into a
>repository and look at them side-by-side. (The basic VIM concept set
is
>only a dozen concepts or so. It should not be necessary to include all
>the infrastructure on which the UoM part is built -- the idea here is to
>identify the UoM concepts that are captured.)
The need to produce a set of UoM concepts that is both a formal ontology and
related to the VIM concepts is important. It give us a chance of creating
"the ontology for units of measure" rather than "yet another
ontology for
units of measure". The work also has a possibility of adding clarity to
the VIM.
<Aside>
Evan uses the term "quantity value" which is defined within the VIM.
I have
read the definition many times: "number and reference together expressing
magnitude of a quantity". I think that this phrase should be read as
follows:
number_and_reference_together - expressing_magnitude_of - a_quantity
but it could be read as:
number_and_reference_together - expressing - magnitude_of_a_quantity
Hence is the thing identified by (or "expressed by") 2.54 cm a
"quantity" or
a "magnitude_of_a_quantity"? Somebody must know, or is there a
deliberate
ambiguity. :)
</Aside>
I would like to volunteer for a role in the ontology formulation as
suggested in Ed's proposal. It would fit well with my the work within the
CEN ELSSI Workshop, which is creating an ontology derived from ISO material
test data standards for the formal definition of material test procedures
and for the formal representation material test data.
Best regards,
David
At 15:15 10/07/2009 -0400, you wrote:
>With respect to language selection for UoM, Ed wrote:
>
>> (2) Language selection
>> Since we are going to propose a standard
ontology, it should be
>> documented in one or more standard languages.
>> Technically, we have at this time only 3
good choices: CLIF, RDF,
>> and OWL. But it should be noted that "OWL" is an
umbrella for several
>> languages, one of which (OWL/Full) might be considered the best choice
>> for an appropriate RDF dialect. We need to make choices among
these for
>> the normative ontologies.
>> These languages have very different
expressive powers. I suggest
>> that we choose one axiomatic form and one (extended) DL form, and do
all
>> the formal ontology work in exactly those languages.
>> We also need a non-normative graphical
representation, to enable
>> rapid comprehension. The ODM Profile for OWL (using UML tools)
suggests
>> itself, but I usually use a more vanilla UML form for presentation of
>> basic concepts. And something adequate that is supported by
>> web-available tooling (like Protegé) is a good alternative.
>> I suggest that we choose a useful
graphical form supported by
>> available tools and use it, exclusively, for presentation and
discussion
>> in the group. Further, I suggest that we will include
non-normative
>> diagrams in this language in the proposed standard, as an aid to
reader
>> comprehension.
>I would second the idea of developing the ontology model simultaneously in
>an expressive language like IKL and an extended version of OWL DL.
One form
>of the latter might actually mostly define an extension to OWL per
[1].
>The goal
>would be to insure support in OWL DL reasoners for the UoM model that we
>develop,
>where that support would include dimensional analysis, conversion, and
>appropriate
>interpretation of the results (essentially identity correspondence of
>quantities with
>equivalent quantity values, e.g., 2.54 Centimeters and 1 Inch).
>Whatever we do for
>OWL, it is important that each model make sense on its own, and that
>each makes
>appropriate use of the language (or the language+extension) in which it
>is expressed.
>
>-Evan
>
>[1] http://www.webont.org/owled/2008/papers/owled2008eu_submission_34.pdf
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
>Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Config/Unsubscribe:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-std/
>Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
>Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard
>
>
>
============================================================
David Leal
CAESAR Systems Limited
registered office: 29 Somertrees
Avenue, Lee, London
SE12 0BS
registered in England no. 2422371
tel: +44 (0)20 8857 1095
mob: +44 (0)77 0702 6926
e-mail: david.leal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
web site: http://www.caesarsystems.co.uk
============================================================
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-std/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard
====================================================================
Visit the BSI website at www.bsigroup.com
This email may contain confidential information and/or copyright
material. This email is intended for the use of the addressee only.
Any unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you receive this email
by mistake, please advise the sender immediately by using the
reply facility in your email software.
Thank you for your cooperation.
________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all known viruses.
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-std/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard
====================================================================
Visit the BSI website at www.bsigroup.com
This email may contain confidential information and/or
copyright
material. This email is intended for the use of the addressee
only.
Any unauthorised use may be unlawful. If you receive this
email
by mistake, please advise the sender immediately by using the
reply
facility in your email software.
Thank you for your cooperation.
________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all known viruses.
|