Re: dwbp-ACTION-271: create a dimension for precision in the DQV namespace

Dear all,
I have to change my mind  about not providing  guidance on the unity of
measures.
That is because, I have figured out that RDF data cube suggests  how to
deal with unit of measures.
Being our dqv:Measurement a subclass of  qb:Observation (RDF CUBE
observation),  I think we should adopt the same strategy indicated in RDF
Data Cube.

So,
I have added an usage note in the class dqv:QualityMeasurement saying

The unit of measure in quality measurement should be specified through the
property sdmx-attribute:unitMeasure as recommended by RDF Data Cube
[Vocab-Data-Cube]. The Ontology of units of Measure (OM) [RijgersbergEtAl]
provides a list of HTTP dereferenceable unit of measures which can be
exploited as values for sdmx-attribute:unitMeasure.

I have  also update the example [2] accordingly.

Please let me know if there are  comments or objections.

Cheers,
Riccardo

 [Vocab-Data-Cube] Richard Cyganiak; Dave Reynolds. The RDF Data Cube
Vocabulary. W3C Recommendation 16 January 2014. URL:
https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-data-cube/
 [Rijgersberg&vanAssem]. Hajo Rijgersberg, Mark van Assem, Jan L. Top: Ontology
of units of measure and related concepts. SWJ, pp. 3-13 Volume 4, Number 1,
2013

On 25 March 2016 at 15:30, Riccardo Albertoni <albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it>
wrote:

> Hi all,
> I have added the precision instance [1] and an example showing how
> accuracy and precision can be documented with DQV  [2].
>
> Reading again the email from  Andrea [3], the only thing we still have not
> addressed is  a way to  formally express the scale of the quality
> measurement. A formal representation of the scale would be useful to
> convert  automatically measurements coming from different parties.
>
> Unfortunately, I think we do not have time  to  go deep on that, even if
> there are already some solutions defined by third parties (e.g., [4] )    I
> am not  comfortable in adopting a solution in such a short time.
>
> my view is that
> If (due to the short term schedule)  we are not in the position to suggest
> the best way  ( or at least a good way) to document the scale of
> measurements, we should consider to  leave  open the formal definition of
> scale ...
>
> If there are no further comments, I would suggest to close this action and
> to forward the example to Andrea and the SDW group.
> Cheers,
> Riccardo
>
>
>
> [1] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html#dqv:precision
> [2]
> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html#ExpressDatasetAccuracyPrecision
> [3]
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-comments/2016Mar/0007.html
> [4]http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/system/files/swj1247.pdf
>
> On 17 March 2016 at 01:40, Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov> wrote:
>
>> Ah, good. Sounds like you're thinking about this smartly.
>> Thanks,
>> -Annette
>>
>>
>> On 3/16/16 2:46 PM, Antoine Isaac wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Annette,
>>>
>>> There are some sources that use 'precision' for what is called
>>> 'resolution' elsewhere, indeed. Riccardo and this inflicted ourselves some
>>> reading on this during a side session of the F2F ;-)
>>> The original need expressed by SDW is really about resolution/precision.
>>> But with the general aim being to show that too fine resolution can be
>>> completely pointless, so you shouldn't worry. To reflect this we will have
>>> to touch a bit the notion of accuracy.
>>>
>>> We'll invite you to check the result of the action of course!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Antoine
>>>
>>> On 3/16/16 7:58 PM, Annette Greiner wrote:
>>>
>>>> The use of the term "precision" here is a little alarming to me in
>>>> light of the distinction between precision and accuracy. We should avoid
>>>> any incentivization of high precision, as precise values are not
>>>> necessarily accurate. The precision reported for a measurement needs to be
>>>> appropriate to the accuracy with which it was taken. Resolution is a
>>>> different thing altogether, and the references listed in the action are
>>>> about resolution, not precision and not accuracy.
>>>> -Annette
>>>>
>>>> http://en-us.fluke.com/training/training-library/test-tools/digital-multimeters/accuracy-resolution-range-counts-digits-and-precision.html
>>>>
>>>> On 3/16/16 6:35 AM, Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Issue
>>>> Tracker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> dwbp-ACTION-271: create a dimension for precision in the DQV namespace
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/271
>>>>>
>>>>> Assigned to: Riccardo Albertoni
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On product: Quality & Granularity Vocabulary
>>>>>
>>>>> create a dimension for precision in the DQV namespace
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Annette Greiner
>> NERSC Data and Analytics Services
>> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Riccardo Albertoni
> Istituto per la Matematica Applicata e Tecnologie Informatiche "Enrico
> Magenes"
> Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche
> via de Marini 6 - 16149 GENOVA - ITALIA
> tel. +39-010-6475624 - fax +39-010-6475660
> e-mail: Riccardo.Albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it
> Skype: callto://riccardoalbertoni/
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardoalbertoni
> www: *http://www.imati.cnr.it/ <http://www.imati.cnr.it/>*
> http://purl.oclc.org/NET/riccardoAlbertoni
> FOAF:http://purl.oclc.org/NET/RiccardoAlbertoni/foaf
>



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Riccardo Albertoni
Istituto per la Matematica Applicata e Tecnologie Informatiche "Enrico
Magenes"
Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche
via de Marini 6 - 16149 GENOVA - ITALIA
tel. +39-010-6475624 - fax +39-010-6475660
e-mail: Riccardo.Albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it
Skype: callto://riccardoalbertoni/
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardoalbertoni
www: *http://www.imati.cnr.it/ <http://www.imati.cnr.it/>*
http://purl.oclc.org/NET/riccardoAlbertoni
FOAF:http://purl.oclc.org/NET/RiccardoAlbertoni/foaf