- From: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:18:28 +0100
- To: public-gld-comments@w3.org
On 20/07/12 13:52, Thomas Bandholtz wrote:
> Oh Dave,
>
> Am 20.07.2012 14:33, schrieb Dave Reynolds:
>> Like I say, there is nothing to stop you attaching the UoM to the
>> MeasureProperty itself.
>>
>> While that's not listed as an explicit qb:Attachable there's nothing
>> to prevent you doing that.
>
> To my understanding this wouldn't make any difference. The range of
> qb:componentAttachment is rdfs:Class, I would need multiple UoM
> components, each of them attached to a different *instance* of
> qb:MeasureProperty.
The range of qb:componentAttachment isn't relevant here.
qb:componentAttachment is how you describe the level at which an
attribute is being attached. That's not how you attach the attribute
itself.
So you would have something like:
eg:myDSD a qb:DataStructureDefinition;
qb:component [qb:measure eg:measure1 ];
qb:component [qb:measure eg:measure2 ];
qb:component [qb:attribute sdmx-attribute:unitMeasure;
qb:componentAttachment qb:MeasureProperty;]
.
eg:measure1 a qb:MeasureProperty;
sdmx-attribute:unitMeasure unit:Percent .
eg:measure2 a qb:MeasureProperty;
sdmx-attribute:unitMeasure unit:Count .
eg:observation1 a qb:Observation;
eg:measure1 55;
eg:measure2 1333;
.
[All the above manually typed quickly, no guarantees of correctness.]
> It's like describing life expectancy and hat size in a single
> qb:Observation instance, each of them with a distinct UoM ;-)
Quite :)
If the above isn't satisfying (and it's not something explicitly
sanctioned by the spec so is questionable) then use QUDT as I mentioned
before - the domain of qudt:unit is open:
eg:myDSD a qb:DataStructureDefinition;
qb:component [qb:measure eg:measure1 ];
qb:component [qb:measure eg:measure2 ];
.
eg:measure1 a qb:MeasureProperty;
qudt:unit unit:Percent .
eg:measure2 a qb:MeasureProperty;
qudt:unit unit:Count .
Dave
Received on Friday, 20 July 2012 13:19:00 UTC