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

RE: URIs / Ontology for Physical Units and Quantities

From: Wes Turner <wes.turner@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 19:19:36 -0500
Message-ID: <CACfEFw8TKV_tHMYhwReBz395dGGVdf7f4BoM0u=Vg3qAm5nnBA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonathan.Yu@csiro.au
Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org
Thanks! I should have searched first!
On May 6, 2015 7:11 PM, <Jonathan.Yu@csiro.au> wrote:

>  Hi Wes,
>
>
>
> FYI, a former colleague Laurent Lefort and others did publish a quantities
> and units ontology derived from the UN/CEFACT stuff a little while ago for
> the SSN activity. So if you want to use the UN/CEFACT codes, see
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/ssnx/qu/qu-rec20
>
>
>
> The RDF/OWL file here:
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/ssnx/qu/qu-rec20.owl
>
>
>
> The URIs in that OWL file map the UN/CEFACT codes to URIs in the SSN/QU
> namespace.
>
>
>
> Otherwise, as you mention QUDT is an alternative. Also the wurvoc OM units
> ontology (http://www.wurvoc.org/vocabularies/om-1.8/) has URIs minted for
> various units e.g. http://www.wurvoc.org/vocabularies/om-1.8/litre
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>
>
> *Jonathan Yu*
>
> Senior Experimental Scientist | Computer Scientist
>
> Environmental Information Infrastructures | Integrated Basin Management
> and Informatics | Water Resources Management | Land and Water Flagship
>
> CSIRO
>
> *E* jonathan.yu@csiro.au *T* +61 3 9252 6440 *M* +61 4 7773 0733
>
> Graham Road, Highett Vic 3190
>
> www.csiro.au
>
>
>
> *PLEASE NOTE*
>
> The information contained in this email may be confidential or privileged.
> Any unauthorised use or disclosure is prohibited. If you have received this
> email in error, please delete it immediately and notify the sender by
> return email. Thank you. To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO does not
> represent, warrant and/or guarantee that the integrity of this
> communication has been maintained or that the communication is free of
> errors, virus, interception or interference.
>
> *Please consider the environment before printing this email.*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Wes Turner [mailto:wes.turner@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, 7 May 2015 8:38 AM
> *To:* martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
> *Cc:* W3C Web Schemas Task Force; ☮ elf Pavlik ☮
> *Subject:* Re: URIs / Ontology for Physical Units and Quantities
>
>
>
> So, the UN/CEFACT to publish RDF would require generating some triples
> from an excel document, and publishing it with a permalink URI?
>
>
>
> * It seems odd to be relying upon non-URI keys with Linked Data.
>
> * It would be very easy to publish an RDF version of this crucial dataset
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 5:31 PM, martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org <
> martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:
>
> 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!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Wes Turner
> https://westurner.org
>
> https://wrdrd.com/docs/consulting/knowledge-engineering
>
Received on Thursday, 7 May 2015 00:20:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 7 May 2015 00:20:05 UTC