Re: URIs / Ontology for Physical Units and Quantities

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Mark Harrison <mark.harrison@cantab.net>
wrote:

> Dear Martin,
>
> For the record:
> 1)      It appears that we (and perhaps many others on this list but
> perhaps not everyone) agree that QUDT is very valuable.
> 2)      I would not promise that assigning URIs to everything will bring
> world peace or cure cancer, although it is certainly encouraging to see
> Linked Data technology already being used in life sciences to help to
> discover cures for diseases and more efficiently link together the
> individual discoveries and evidence documented across several academic
> papers, to obtain a wider end-to-end understanding of potential cause and
> effect.
>

schema.org/MedicalEntity resources have URIs

In regards to curing cancer and linked data:

* https://wiki.nci.nih.gov/display/LexEVS/LexEVS+6.x+OWL+Export+Guide
* https://github.com/ncbo/umls2rdf
* http://data.linkedct.org/sparql
* http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3745940/
* *http://schema.org/docs/meddocs.html
<http://schema.org/docs/meddocs.html>*
* https://github.com/westurner/openfda-jsonld-testing
  * https://github.com/westurner/elasticsearchjsonld
    (ElasticSearch mapping -> JSON-LD context)
* ... linksFrom: https://westurner.org/opengov/us/#openfda-fda
*
  * https://wrdrd.com/docs/consulting/knowledge-engineering#prov


> 3)      I am very encouraged by Ralph's response today about the current
> status and future plans for QUDT and have offered to provide some help with
> beta testing etc.  To the request that Wes made, we might also be able to
> provide a JSON-LD example of its usage in connection with markup of
> nutritional information and ingredients of a food product, to give everyone
> a more concrete example - at least for some units of mass (grams,
> milligrams, micrograms) and energy (kilojoules and kilocalories).
>
>
A nutritional example would be great.

Ideas for examples for helpfully also demonstrating composition and
transformation:
* a smoothie


> Best wishes,
>
> - Mark
>
>
>
> On 7 May 2015, at 21:04, "martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org" <
> martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:
>
> > Dear Mark:
> > For the record: QUDT is very, very valuable. But I am eagerly waiting
> for the day someone promises that turning everything into URIs will bring
> world peace or cure cancer .... (*)
> >
> >
> > (*) Credits to Stuart Madnick (MIT), who created this in the context of
> XML - http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=281823
> >
> >
> > Martin
> >
> >
> >> On 07 May 2015, at 10:56, Mark Harrison <mark.harrison@cantab.net>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Martin,
> >>
> >> I understand your very valid concerns about Linked Data resources that
> are not supported and maintained and end us wasting time for developers.
> However, from this thread it also seems that there is quite some interest
> in having a well recognised ontology for units of measure in which units
> have corresponding stable URIs that link to definitions, UN ECE codes,
> conversion factors and offsets, etc.  QUDT 1.1 made a very good start on
> this, although it had one or two inaccurate cross-references.  For example,
> I found within http://qudt.org/vocab/unit#Grain the following nonsensical
> triple:
> >>
> >>      <http://qudt.org/vocab/unit#Grain>  skos:exactMatch  <
> http://dbpedia.org/resource/Cereal> .
> >>
> >> There are some other gaps in QUDT 1.1, such as missing resources for
> units such as milligram, microgram - and because the SI base unit of mass
> is the kilogram, it is not sufficient to simply define the multipliers such
> as 'milli', 'micro', because we don't usually talk about milligrams as
> microkilograms, for example.
> >>
> >> Having said that, if QUDT 1.1 were updated, corrected, supported a more
> complete set of units and provided cross-references to the corresponding UN
> ECE Common Code values as strings, I think it (or something very like it)
> could be an extremely valuable resource for everyone, especially because of
> the conversion factors and offsets.
> >>
> >> The QUDT.org website appears to be last updated in March 2014 and there
> is some information and a presentation by Ralph Hodgson (copied) about the
> plans for release 2.0 of QUDT.  However, I'm not sure whether that work has
> stalled or is under-resourced or is spending a long time in careful
> internal review.  Maybe those of us who are interested in making this
> happen could offer to share the workload and accelerate the progress.  In
> case NASA / TopQuadrant is no longer the place to host it, then perhaps we
> could reasonably ask W3C to host it in perpetuity and maintain a liaison
> with the UN, ISO and other relevant bodies to ensure that we're aware of
> their changes that should be reflected through maintenance updates to such
> a vocabulary.
> >>
> >> We're soon hoping to see much more structured data about products being
> published openly on the web as linked data, potentially including details
> about ingredients, nutrition and allergens.  GS1 has already prepared begun
> drafting a web vocabulary [ see http://www.gs1.org/gtin_plus_public_review
> ] to help manufacturers and retailers express such information in much
> richer detail than they can currently using schema.org alone - and
> efforts are underway to harmonise this effort with schema.org to make
> life easier for developers.  I expect that a stable supported ontology with
> URIs and Linked Data for units of measure along the lines of a QUDT 2.0
> could be far more useful to software developers than simply denoting a unit
> of measure by its UN ECE Common Code string.  We can certainly do better
> than that.  It could almost certainly avoid a large amount of duplicated
> effort in coding conversion factors and offsets and would also help to
> ensure that whether the product specifications are provided in SI units or
> non-SI units (as they are in different regions of the world), the same
> quantitative information is readily available so software applications,
> without ambiguity or unnecessary duplication of effort by developers.
> >>
> >> I hope that Ralph Hodgson can chime in with a brief status update on
> QUDT 2.0 - and also that those of us who would be interested in helping to
> accelerate this (or something similar) can step forward and offer to help
> with reviewing it or beta testing it - or filling in the gaps for the
> missing features.
> >>
> >> Best wishes,
> >>
> >> - Mark Harrison
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7 May 2015, at 09:08, martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dear Kingsley:
> >>> Technically, as we agree, this is no big deal.
> >>>
> >>> But there are so many abandoned RDF / Semantic Web efforts rottening
> on the Web and wasting the time of developers who try to built something on
> top of it -- until they find out that the project is way out of date --
> that I do not see any gain in such a quick fix.
> >>>
> >>> Martin
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On 07 May 2015, at 01:25, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 5/6/15 6:31 PM, 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
> >>>>
> >>>> Martin,
> >>>>
> >>>> What's wrong with:
> >>>>
> >>>> <#someResolvableVariantOfIdentifier>
> >>>> a owl:Thing ;
> >>>> dcterms:identifier "{literal-variant-of-standard-identifier}" .
> >>>>
> >>>> Which can be further embellished by Linked Data publisher in their
> ontology/vocabulary by adding the following:
> >>>>
> >>>> dcterms:identifier
> >>>> a owl:InverseFunctionalProperty .
> >>>>
> >>>> Productive workflow:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. Get the data dump in a spreadsheet
> >>>> 2. Save as CSV
> >>>> 3. Load into LOD or Google Refine
> >>>> 4. Map to relevant ontology (existing, or new)
> >>>> 5. Dump data into an RDF document
> >>>> 6. Publish (note: using # as indexical mechanism makes the
> publication Linked Open Data prinicples compliant off-the bat).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It can be done quite easily. I deliberatly opted not to do it :)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Kingsley
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> 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!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Kingsley Idehen
> >>>> Founder & CEO
> >>>> OpenLink Software
> >>>> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> >>>> Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com
> >>>> Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> >>>> Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
> >>>> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
> >>>> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
> >>>> Personal WebID:
> http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>