- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 17:30:18 -0400
- To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@ccf.org>, Michel_Dumontier <Michel_Dumontier@carleton.ca>, "public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
On Fri, 2010-09-10 at 16:08 -0400, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: > If we pick a unit and annotate the predicates, > then the folks who would have to do the work of merging with non-TMO > documents (who would have to introduce some rules/canonicalization > pipeline anyways) have the OWL hooks to automate that merging. This seems pretty compelling to me. And if you want to provide an easier on-ramp for merging non-TMO documents then you could *also* provide a separate bridging ontology and rules that would permit multiple units be transformed into the canonical units. That approach would still leave the TMO ontology and queries as simple as possible. BTW, as a reminder about the importance of making units explicitly visible wherever a number is used -- and this is largely orthogonal to the design choice being discussed above -- the Mars Climate Orbiter was famously lost because one team assumed Metric units and another team assumed English units: ftp://ftp.hq.nasa.gov/pub/pao/reports/1999/MCO_report.pdf -- David Booth, Ph.D. Cleveland Clinic (contractor) http://dbooth.org/ Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Cleveland Clinic.
Received on Friday, 10 September 2010 21:30:50 UTC