On Oct 5, 2009, at 10:19 AM, Mike Bennett wrote: (01)
> These are all legal terms rather than physical facts about the thing.
> This is interesting because it means that legal terms (and
> restrictions
> including contractual restrictions, limitations to warranties and so
> on)
> have facts about them which are demoninated in most of the same
> units as
> actual physical measurements are. The same would apply to that
> "Maximum
> operating temperature" example - the thing might or might not blow up,
> but the material fact of the matter is that if it breaks, the
> manufacturer won't replace it for you under warranty (assuming they
> find
> out, that is). That's a consideration about units that's quite a long
> way from considerations about measuring things.
>
> This is another good reason not to lock the ontology of units of
> measure
> into the ontology of things that are measured or an ontology of ways
> that things may be measured. (02)
+1 (03)
Pat (04)
>
> Mike
>
> Matthew West wrote:
>> Dear Chris and Ingvar,
>>
>> I've been away and missed this.
>>
>>
>>> The direct/indirect distinction was raised by Matthew and can be
>>> found in
>>> ISO 15926. Matthew or David can give you the latest links if you
>>> cannot
>>> google it.
>>>
>>> It is part of an ongoing discussion elsewhere on the list ... e.g.
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Matthew W: "Could you give me a unit (or two) that you think only
>>> applies to
>>> one kind-of-quantity, and I'll see if I can identify another?
>>>
>>> IJ-answer: m (length), kg (mass), and t (duration).
>>>
>>
>> MW: So some other quantity kinds that use these units would be:
>> Maximum ship length allowed on berth
>> Maximum allowed loaded weight
>> Minimum Dwell Time (but you did not actually give a unit for this)
>>
>> Any other takers?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Matthew West
>> Information Junction
>> Tel: +44 560 302 3685
>> Mobile: +44 750 3385279
>> matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
>> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
>>
>> This email originates from Information Junction Ltd. Registered in
>> England and Wales No. 6632177.
>> Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way, Letchworth Garden City,
>> Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> The issue is, as you have indicated, one about the scope of the UoM
>>> ontology.
>>> This question of 'indirect' units was being discussed and I
>>> (assuming that
>>> this meant it was an 'allowed' topic) commented on it. Was I
>>> mistaken? So, I
>>> made no judgment about whether it is in our scope (your question
>>> seems to
>>> imply I did) - I'll let you guys argue about that.
>>>
>>> However, if I was asked to make such a judgement I would say that
>>> it is a
>>> difficult call. With the direct units it is reasonably easy to say
>>> how these
>>> should be used. For indirect properties it is more difficult, but
>>> much more
>>> useful. The engineers I have worked with would like to find some
>>> kind of
>>> answer other than rule of thumb. A substantial proportion of the
>>> quantities
>>> measures in their datasheets are 'indirect'. So, for them, the
>>> distinction
>>> is important.
>>>
>>> If one does include them in, one of the problems is the sheer
>>> number of
>>> indirect relationships and the lack of organisation. I think there
>>> is some
>>> work to be done on explaining / understanding / unbundling the
>>> indirect
>>> relationship if one wishes to get a reasonably general set of
>>> rules.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Well, indeed. But surely this notion of proper operation is not
>>>>
>>> part
>>>
>>>> of an ontology of units and quantities, even if that is
>>>>
>>> understood to
>>>
>>>> cover issues of how quantities are measured.
>>>>
>>> So, if one would like some general classification of indirect
>>> units, my
>>> guess is that it will be.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Chris Partridge
>>> Chief Ontologist
>>>
>>> Mobile: +44 790 5167263
>>> Phone: +44 20 81331891
>>> Fax: +44 20 7855 0268
>>> E-Mail: partridgec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> BORO Centre Limited
>>> Website: www.BOROCentre.com
>>> Registered in England No: 04418581
>>> Registered Office: 25 Hart Street, Henley on
>>> Thames,
>>> Oxfordshire RG9 2AR
>>>
>>> This email message is intended for the named recipient(s) only. It
>>> may be
>>> privileged and/or confidential. If you are not an intended named
>>> recipient
>>> of this email then you should not copy it or use it for any
>>> purpose, nor
>>> disclose its contents to any other person. You should contact BORO
>>> Centre
>>> Limited as shown above so that we can take appropriate action at no
>>> cost to
>>> yourself. All BORO Centre Limited outgoing E-mails are checked
>>> using Anti
>>> Virus software.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Pat Hayes [mailto:phayes@xxxxxxx]
>>>> Sent: 30 September 2009 23:50
>>>> To: uom-ontology-std; Chris Partridge
>>>> Subject: Re: [uom-ontology-std] What is mass?
>>>>
>>>> Chris, before proceeding, could you please tell us what you mean
>>>>
>>> by a
>>>
>>>> 'direct' property, and why you feel that this direct/indirect
>>>> distinction is relevant to our main goal here of formalizing an
>>>> ontology of quantities and units.
>>>>
>>>> Pat Hayes
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 30, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Chris Partridge wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Gunther,
>>>>>
>>>>> Your examples seem to agree with my point that indirect
>>>>>
>>> properties are
>>>
>>>>> different from direct ones.
>>>>> And I see you cash out the indirect property as a state (the
>>>>>
>>> option
>>>
>>>>> I noted
>>>>> in my original email).
>>>>>
>>>>> In your example, as far as I can ascertain, you describe
>>>>>
>>> observing a
>>>
>>>>> direct
>>>>> temperature, but you stipulate an indirect temperature - e.g.
>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>> "Maximum
>>>>> operating temperature of Machine X" rather than observing or
>>>>> measuring it.
>>>>> My guess is that there is more than mere stipulation involved
>>>>>
>>> here.
>>>
>>>>> One of things your example does not capture is what operating
>>>>>
>>> properly
>>>
>>>>> entails.
>>>>>
>>>> Well, indeed. But surely this notion of proper operation is not
>>>>
>>> part
>>>
>>>> of an ontology of units and quantities, even if that is
>>>>
>>> understood to
>>>
>>>> cover issues of how quantities are measured.
>>>>
>>>> One can play this game of 'you havn't captured X' for ever.
>>>> Eventually, it will always become circular.
>>>>
>>>> Pat
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Typically there are quite a few ceteris paribus conditions,
>>>>>
>>> which
>>>
>>>>> are not mentioned here (or are implied by the use of the phrase
>>>>>
>>> "act
>>>
>>>>> of
>>>>> operating properly").
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll leave it to the engineers to provide examples of scale
>>>>> properties of
>>>>> temperature.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Chris Partridge
>>>>> Chief Ontologist
>>>>>
>>>>> Mobile: +44 790 5167263
>>>>> Phone: +44 20 81331891
>>>>> Fax: +44 20 7855 0268
>>>>> E-Mail: partridgec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>
>>>>> BORO Centre Limited
>>>>> Website: www.BOROCentre.com
>>>>> Registered in England No: 04418581
>>>>> Registered Office: 25 Hart Street, Henley on
>>>>>
>>> Thames,
>>>
>>>>> Oxfordshire RG9 2AR
>>>>>
>>>>> This email message is intended for the named recipient(s) only.
>>>>>
>>> It
>>>
>>>>> may be
>>>>> privileged and/or confidential. If you are not an intended
>>>>>
>>> named
>>>
>>>>> recipient
>>>>> of this email then you should not copy it or use it for any
>>>>>
>>> purpose,
>>>
>>>>> nor
>>>>> disclose its contents to any other person. You should contact
>>>>>
>>> BORO
>>>
>>>>> Centre
>>>>> Limited as shown above so that we can take appropriate action
>>>>>
>>> at no
>>>
>>>>> cost to
>>>>> yourself. All BORO Centre Limited outgoing E-mails are checked
>>>>>
>>> using
>>>
>>>>> Anti
>>>>> Virus software.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: uom-ontology-std-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>
>>> [mailto:uom-ontology-std-
>>>
>>>>>> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gunther Schadow
>>>>>> Sent: 30 September 2009 22:54
>>>>>> To: uom-ontology-std
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [uom-ontology-std] What is mass?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chris Partridge wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They seem to be like Cambridge properties, in as much as it
>>>>>>>
>>> is not
>>>
>>>>>>> clear
>>>>>>>
>>>>> how
>>>>>
>>>>>>> mere examination of the object will reveal (the value of) the
>>>>>>> property.
>>>>>>>
>>>>> So
>>>>>
>>>>>>> some kind of explanation of the relation is needed to
>>>>>>>
>>> understand it.
>>>
>>>>>>> At the practical engineering level, the normal
>>>>>>>
>>> interpretations of
>>>
>>>>>>> scale
>>>>>>> operations such as addition (e.g. in the case of mass,
>>>>>>>
>>> putting both
>>>
>>>>> objects
>>>>>
>>>>>>> with the mass on the same scale) and so on do not seem to
>>>>>>>
>>> work in
>>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>> same
>>>>>
>>>>>>> way.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> This only works for extensive properties. It fails with
>>>>>>
>>> temperature
>>>
>>>>>> already. So that aspect does not seem to make a difference
>>>>>>
>>> between
>>>
>>>>>> maximum allowable temperature and actual temperature.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To me "maximum allowable temperature" is the upper bound of
>>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>> "operating temperature" interval, which in turn is a criterion
>>>>>>
>>> over
>>>
>>>>>> the actual temperature property. The way we handle such things
>>>>>>
>>> in
>>>
>>>>>> HL7 is like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Maximum temperature = 40 degree Celsius" is
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Observation (criterion)
>>>>>> of quantity /core temperature/
>>>>>> at time /any time/
>>>>>> has value [15;40] degree Celsius
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Actual temperature 25 degree Celsius" is
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Observation (actual)
>>>>>> of quantity /core temperature/
>>>>>> at time 2009-09-30T15:05
>>>>>> has value [24.5;25.5] degree Celsius
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Actual temperature 43 degree Celsius" is
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Observation (actual)
>>>>>> of quantity /core temperatue/
>>>>>> at time 2009-09-30T15:15
>>>>>> has value [42.5;43.5] degree Celsius
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Comparison between a criterion and an actual quantity is done
>>>>>>
>>> by
>>>
>>>>>> comparing whether the actual quantity is included in the
>>>>>>
>>> criterion.
>>>
>>>>>> That way one can also define other criteria, such as
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Alarm temperature at > 35 degree Celsius"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Observation (criterion)
>>>>>> of quantity /core temperature/
>>>>>> at time /any time/
>>>>>> has value [35;-) degree Celsius
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The difference between the 2 criteria is how they are related
>>>>>>
>>> to
>>>
>>>>>> other information. For example, operating temperature would be
>>>>>> related to the operation act that the machine performs whereas
>>>>>> alarm temperature would be related to the alarm action:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Act "to operate properly"
>>>>>> isPerformedBy Machine
>>>>>> hasThroughCondition Observation (criterion) for "operating
>>>>>> temperature
>>>>>> range"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Act "to raise alarm"
>>>>>> isPerformedBy TemperatureMonitor
>>>>>> hasSubject Machine
>>>>>> hasTriggerCondition Observation (criterion) for "alarm
>>>>>>
>>> temperature"
>>>
>>>>>> so a lot of these notions of "indirect properties" is in my
>>>>>>
>>> view
>>>
>>>>>> best modeled by additional structures. But nevertheless one
>>>>>>
>>> can
>>>
>>>>>> always define a property as a primitive to stand for such a
>>>>>>
>>> complex
>>>
>>>>>> model. E.g.,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Maximum operating temperature of Machine X" :=
>>>>>> the high boundary of
>>>>>> the range value of
>>>>>> the Observation (criterion)
>>>>>> of quantity /core temperature/
>>>>>> which is the throughCondition of
>>>>>> the act of operating properly
>>>>>> performed by
>>>>>> the Machine X.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If we avoid such "indirect properties" with such models, there
>>>>>>
>>> are
>>>
>>>>>> then fewer true "direct properties" left, such as /core
>>>>>>
>>> temperature/.
>>>
>>>>>> However, you still have multiple temperatures, such as
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - core temperature
>>>>>> - surface temperature
>>>>>> - measured by holding a thermometer close to the shell
>>>>>> - measured by an attached thermometer (using heat transfer
>>>>>>
>>> creme)
>>>
>>>>>> and lo and behold, we can't really compare the core
>>>>>>
>>> temperature and
>>>
>>>>>> the surface temperature to find out if the machine is still
>>>>>> operating.
>>>>>> But we can compare the surface temperatures with core
>>>>>>
>>> temperatures
>>>
>>>>>> to find out that the surface temperatures are always closer to
>>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>> ambient temperature than the core temperature.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>> -Gunther
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Gunther Schadow, M.D., Ph.D.
>>>>>> gschadow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> Associate Professor Indiana University School of
>>>>>> Informatics
>>>>>> Regenstrief Institute, Inc. Indiana University School of
>>>>>> Medicine
>>>>>> tel:1(317)423-5521 http://
>>>>>> aurora.regenstrief.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> IHMC (850)434 8903 or
>>>>
>>> (650)494 3973
>>>
>>>> 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
>>>> Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
>>>> FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile
>>>> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Mike Bennett
> Director
> Hypercube Ltd.
> 89 Worship Street
> London EC2A 2BF
> Tel: +44 (0) 20 7917 9522
> Mob: +44 (0) 7721 420 730
> www.hypercube.co.uk
> Registered in England and Wales No. 2461068
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> (05)
------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes (06)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (07)
|