Re: [uom-ontology-std] An UoM Ontology based on UCUM v1.6

["Chute, Christopher G., M.D., Dr. P.H." <chute@xxxxxxxx>]

Friends,

This thread has been overwhelmingly philosophical (units/dimensions parsimony) which is interesting.  The Indiana license for UCUM is consistent with many licenses in the health informatics world (such as LOINC) which values consistency and the avoidance of fragmentation above arbitrary enhancement.  This implies that enhancements are done through channels, and result in a comparable and consistent product.

This is either good or bad, depending upon perspective.  My perspective as a work-a-day biomedical researcher with a strong emphasis on patient data representation to support inferencing, quality improvement, outcomes research, and genotype to phenotype associations, comes down hugely on comparability and consistency uber alles.  While I delight in philosophical enhancements of ontologies and terminologies, I would resist their arbitrary incorporation in what is advertised as a derivative of "a standard."

As for standards, I should disclose I am chair elect for the ISO Health Informatics technical committee, and Chair the revision committee for the WHO's International Classification of Disease.

Chris

Christopher G. Chute, MD, DrPH | Prof Medical Informatics | Div Biomedical Statistics and Informatics | College Of Medicine
+1 507-284-5506 | Secretary: +1 507-284-5541 | chute@xxxxxxxx
Mayo Clinic | 200 First Street S.W. | Rochester, MN 55905 | USA
http://mayoresearch.mayo.edu/mayo/research/staff/chute_cg.cfm

-----Original Message-----
From: uom-ontology-std-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:uom-ontology-std-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christopher Spottiswoode
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 8:25 AM
To: uom-ontology-std
Subject: Re: [uom-ontology-std] An UoM Ontology based on UCUM v1.6

Oh dear!  May I assure you, Gunther, that my _expression_ of astonishment ("Wow!")

followed by a direct quote and two questions was not meant as a rant?  I am

sorry that you have taken it as one.  A stimulus? - yes!

Perhaps you could start by telling us where I might have misinterpreted the T&C

as they appear, or how they might be read or applied differently?  They do come

across to me as unrealistically dictatorial, despite their understandable best

of intentions.

Certainly, if UCUM is to be a kind of ingredient in the brew ahead, there should

be a debate on the matter, or at least some clarification of what they really

mean.

Best regards,

Christopher

----- Original Message -----

From: "Gunther Schadow" <gschadow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

To: "uom-ontology-std" <uom-ontology-std@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 2:57 PM

Subject: Re: [uom-ontology-std] An UoM Ontology based on UCUM v1.6

If ranting like this is the spirit of this group, then yes,

in the absence of constructive talking the restriction would

apply. But I didn't think ranting was the spirit of this

group and hence something workable could certainly have been

worked out.

kind regards,

-Gunther

Christopher Spottiswoode wrote:

> Wow!

>

> Following the links below soon reveals the first paragraph of the UCUM

> terms and conditions of use to be this:

>

>     1) To prevent the dilution of the purpose of the Licensed Materials,

>     i.e., that of providing a definitive standard for identifying units

>     of measures in electronic documents and messages, users shall not

>     use any of the Licensed Materials for the purpose of developing or

>     promulgating a different standard for identifying units of measure,

>     regardless of whether the intended use is in the field of medicine,

>     or any other field of science or trade.

>

> While it is easy to have some sympathy with its authors' bold intention,

> have they not with that ruling expressly disallowed any progressive use

> of the UCUM product by the Ontolog UoM (or any other) project?

>

> On the other hand, since the properties of standard units of measure can

> hardly be any body's property, maybe the authors and publishers of UCUM,

> like King Canute, should quit trying to stop the tide from rolling on?

_________________________________________________________________

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

 

_________________________________________________________________

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

 

_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)