uom-ontology-std
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [uom-ontology-std] What is mass?

To: uom-ontology-std <uom-ontology-std@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Chris Partridge <partridgec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:22:21 -0500
Message-id: <0971D55B-AA8B-4C8C-8EB6-194BBB0FCF0F@xxxxxxx>
Although the question wasnt addressed to me, you still get my answer :-)    (01)

On Oct 6, 2009, at 12:39 PM, Chris Partridge wrote:    (02)

> Hi Mike,
>
> It is always useful to try and fit things into one's hierarchy.
>
> But where would you fit the boiling point of water - the counter- 
> example I
> asked you to consider? Presumably not under "Contractual Terms Set" or
> Restriction" or "Law". Or maybe you would?
> And would you put the measurement of 1kg in a sale - the other
> counter-example I asked you to consider? Under "Contractual Terms  
> Set" or
> Restriction" or "Law"? More difficult for me to guess.
>
> MB> I don't really subscribe to this idea of direct and indirect  
> properties,
> But would you be more comfortable if one talked about actual and
> dispositional properties? And so on.
> You would accept there is a difference between say 'being soluble in  
> water'
> and 'being dissolved in water' - or 'having a tendency to get angry'  
> and
> 'begin angry now'.    (03)

There is a difference. However, I do not believe that this difference  
is relevant to the UoM ontology business. And I am virtually certain  
that it - this difference - will not be visibly cashed out in any kind  
of formal distinction in any axioms of any ontology we write. I  
therefore propose that we ignore it, at least until some concrete need  
to consider it comes up from our actual business (ie until I am proved  
wrong.)    (04)

Pat    (05)

>
> 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 Mike Bennett
>> Sent: 06 October 2009 17:50
>> To: uom-ontology-std
>> Subject: Re: [uom-ontology-std] What is mass?
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> I don't really subscribe to this idea of direct and indirect  
>> properties,
>> and I am watching and learning from that aspect of the conversation  
>> as
>> I'm sure there's a lot I can learn from.
>>
>> In my simple view of the world, there are things and there are facts
>> about those things. I'm sure it will be helpful to group those facts
>> that are relationships (object properties) into common supertypes,  
>> and I
>> hope to learn some ideas about that from this discussion on direct  
>> and
>> indirect properties, though I suspect that several different
>> distinctions are being meant here. For instance it could be useful to
>> make a distinction for those facts that are measurable about a thing.
>> However I don't have any strong pre-existing views on how to do  
>> this or
>> when you would need to.
>>
>> For legal terms, our financial industry semantic model has a  
>> concept of
>> a class of thing called "Contractual Terms Set" (specialised for  
>> example
>> as "Bond Coupon Terms Set"). If I were to model such things as  
>> "Maximum
>> ship length allowed on berth" and "Minimum dwell time" then I would
>> model them as contractual terms if these are set in a contract  
>> between
>> the ship owner and the service provider. Alternatively if they were  
>> set
>> in statute I would model them as part of some "Restriction" or "Law"
>> class of Thing. In either case, the question of direct versus  
>> indirect
>> properties would not arise, but if someone had a view on that, they
>> could work it out from inspection of the ontology, just as they could
>> from inspection of the ship, the notices on the quayside, the  
>> papers in
>> the harbourmaster's office and so on. If one is a good enough
>> representation of the other, anyone who was interested in these
>> distinctions could do that.
>>
>> In short, I see this sort of thing as pretty much a philosophy free
>> zone. The questions I ask are what are the facts and how does this
>> business see those facts? (the latter being how I would try to  
>> determine
>> the relevant ontological commitments). But I stand ready to learn  
>> some
>> useful distinctions of high level kinds of object property that are
>> universally helpful in meaningfully defining reality.
>>
>> Hope that clarifies where I'm coming from.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> Chris Partridge wrote:
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> Agree and understand the general comment, but have a problem with  
>>> the
>>> details.
>>>
>>> Am a little confused by the comment "These are all legal terms  
>>> rather
> than
>>> physical facts about the thing."
>>>
>>> If the point is that you consider all so-called indirect  
>>> properties as
>>> legal, then not sure one of the indirect items raised earlier fits -
> i.e.
>>> the boiling point of water.
>>>
>>> There is also quite a lot of legal paraphernalia around direct
> properties.
>>> For examples the weights and measures legislation has things to say
> about
>>> 1kg of apples when it is sold.
>>>
>>> So not sure legal makes the distinction you want here.
>>> However, the legal stuff you refer to are good examples of the  
>>> ceteris
>>> paribus type baggage one needs to erect around dispositions.
>>>
>>> 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 Pat Hayes
>>>> Sent: 05 October 2009 18:49
>>>> To: uom-ontology-std; Mike Bennett
>>>> Subject: Re: [uom-ontology-std] What is mass?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 5, 2009, at 10:19 AM, Mike Bennett wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Pat
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>    (06)

------------------------------------------------------------
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    (07)






_________________________________________________________________
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    (08)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>