You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 15, 2018. It is now read-only.
(from 2010-04-27 telecon minutes,
http://marinemetadata.org/community/teams/ontdevices/mtgs/am20100427)
Description of the action item
Where do scale references fit in the ontology? I'm unclear whether it is
better linked to unit of measure, the sensor or calibration? For example,
http://www.seawatersolutions.com/practical-salinity-scale-pss78-3-w.asp.
Note that codes from BODC embed some of these standards in their
definitions. Probably not the best way, since difficult to extract and
facilitate automatic conversions....
(John and Reyna to follow up on this.)
Please provide any relevant information/links below
Original issue reported on code.google.com by [email protected] on 18 May 2010 at 2:49
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Most standards for specifying values require units but not reference scale. I think it's probably a deep ontological question whether the reference scale is more of a process associated with the measurement, or a narrower characterization of units. Depending on the purpose of the ontology, I could see it either way. It also will depend on implementations you're dealing with -- some systems may consider units invariant and consider the reference scale part of the process, whereas others (like SSDS) may consider the reference scale either an entity in its own right, or linked to the units in some way.
Correct that embedding the scale in the definition of a *measurement* is not so
good, though embedding it in the definition of the units could be good, if your
intent is to pin down the units that carefully.
I know where the absolute answer to this can be found. The OOR folks had a
project on Units of Measure. If they did not come to a conclusion, I don't know
who would. It may even be in their ontology.
In pH, the units terms actually incorporate what might otherwise be called the
reference scale.
If that isn't satisfying, my own answer is that units have reference scales,
and these may be modeled either as part of the units (as in pH), so the units
term will change if the reference scale changes; or as a relationship, wherein
the reference scale is associated with a particular unit.
So this issue seems to be actually closely related with units of measure.
http://www.qudt.org/ looks like a very relevant pointer in this case. In the
QUDT ontology, "A system of units is a set of units which are chosen as the
reference scales for some set of quantity kinds together with the definitions
of each unit."
I will be looking more closely into this ontology later on, but in the meantime
I will also be attentive to further comments on this issue.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
[email protected]
on 18 May 2010 at 2:49The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: