W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > May 2015

Re: URIs / Ontology for Physical Units and Quantities

From: <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 00:31:21 +0200
Cc: W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
Message-Id: <60DD4EE7-7CFF-4A13-BF30-B8505528D17F@ebusiness-unibw.org>
To: Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com>
The problem is not the one time generation. The problems are as follows:

1. Copyright - Are you allowed to republish the code set as RDF?
2. Sustainability - Are you commited to keep the URIs dereferencable, or will some domain grabber take the domain name once the creator has completed his/her PhD and lost interest.
3. Updates - Will you keep the RDF version in sync whenever the standard changes?

Unless there is a clear "yes" to all three questions, it is better to use the official codes than derived URIs.

Martin



> On 06 May 2015, at 23:56, Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> How much time do you think it would take to generate RDF (and namespaced URIs) from the linked spreadsheet?
> 
> Mappings to/from UN/CEFACT codes (as owl:sameAs mappings to strings) could certainly be useful.
> 
> On May 6, 2015 4:31 PM, "martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org" <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:
> I think a validator should simply use the list of valid codes from the most recent UN/CEFACT document (available as MS Excel from http://www.unece.org/cefact/codesfortrade/codes_index.html).
> 
> There might be unit of measurement ontologies out there that hold the UN/CEFACT Common Code string for a subset of all units as a literal value. But for validation, one should use the authoritative list from the Excel files (since they are updated from time to time).
> 
> URIs are not better than strings for validation, because URIs are strings.
> 
> Best wishes / Mit freundlichen Grüßen
> 
> Martin Hepp
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> martin hepp
> e-business & web science research group
> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
> 
> e-mail:  martin.hepp@unibw.de
> phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
> fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
> www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
>          http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
> skype:   mfhepp
> twitter: mfhepp
> 
> Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
> =================================================================
> * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > On 06 May 2015, at 20:34, Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > I notice that with QUDT there are SI conversion factors and complete URIs for each unit.
> >
> > Is there a schema for validation of "schema:QuantativeValues supports all UN/CEFACT Common Codes"?
> >
> > (A similar quandry as with MedicalCode; where URI namespaces (like icd10:) would be more helpful for terminological validation and disambiguation than plain string keys)
> >
> > On May 6, 2015 4:26 AM, "martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org" <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Wes,
> > > sorry for a very late reply:
> > >
> > > Actually you could easily use schema:QuantitativeValue for both time and volume, with SEC as the unit code for t and LTR as the unit code for liters, and link both via schema:valueReference, or better, and owl:subProperty thereof.
> > >
> > > For the principle, see
> > >
> > >      http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Documentation/Structured_values_and_value_references
> > >
> > >
> > > schema:QuantativeValues supports all UN/CEFACT Common Codes for units, which should cover all you need:
> > >
> > >
> > >      http://wiki.goodrelations-vocabulary.org/Documentation/UN/CEFACT_Common_Codes
> > >
> > > (Mind the full list in the public Excel files, the page just highlights a small subset.)
> > >
> > > Best wishes / Mit freundlichen Grüßen
> > >
> > > Martin Hepp
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------
> > > martin hepp
> > > e-business & web science research group
> > > universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
> > >
> > > e-mail:  martin.hepp@unibw.de
> > > phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
> > > fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
> > > www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
> > >          http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
> > > skype:   mfhepp
> > > twitter: mfhepp
> > >
> > > Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
> > > =================================================================
> > > * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On 01 May 2015, at 13:45, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Wes,
> > > >
> > > > On 01/26/2014 07:20 AM, Wes Turner wrote:
> > > >> Say I am trying to share a tabular dataset. [1] There's metadata for
> > > >> the Dataset, and there's metadata for the particular columns (which
> > > >> applies to the particular data items).
> > > >>
> > > >> For example:
> > > >>
> > > >> t   volume (liters)
> > > >> -----------------
> > > >> 1  1
> > > >> 2  0.7
> > > >> 3  0.5
> > > >> 4  0.3
> > > >> 5  0.1
> > > >>
> > > >> Questions
> > > >> ===========
> > > >> # Is there (a good) way to specify these units and quantities (in
> > > >> addition to XSD datatypes)?
> > > > You might like to check out
> > > > * https://iotdb.org/pub/iot-unit.html
> > > >
> > > > Cheers!
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> 
Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2015 22:31:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 6 May 2015 22:31:47 UTC