From OntologPSMW

Jump to: navigation, search
[ ]

Contents

UoM_Ontology_Standard workshop (Face-to-Face) - Fri 2009-10-30     (1)

Topic: Moving the UoM_Ontology_Standard Forward     (1A)

Workshop Co-chair: Mr. Edward Barkmeyer (NIST), Dr. Frank Olken (NSF) & Mr. Howard Mason (BAE, ISO)     (1A1)

This is a face-to-face workshop for the UoM_Ontology_Standard working group. The session will be focused on getting the work, up to this point, into a draft standard. Other members of the community interested in tracking the progress of this work are welcome to join as observers. Remote participation is supported as well.     (1A2)

National Science Foundation,     (1A4)

Room 1235 (Director's Conference Room),     (1A5)

4201 Wilson Blvd.,     (1A6)

Arlington, VA     (1A7)

Our NSF Host: Dr. Frank Olken     (1A8)

Archives     (1A11)

Session Details     (1A12)

  • Discussions and Q & A:     (1A12E)
    • Anyone who wants to speak should raise their hands and/or be recognized by the session chair first, before doing so.     (1A12E1)
    • Before you speak, please always identify yourself and make sure you can be heard (by both onsite and remote participants)     (1A12E2)
    • You can type in your questions or comments through the browser based chat session by:     (1A12E3)
      • instructions: once you got access to the page, click on the "settings" button, and identify yourself (by modifying the Name field). You can indicate that you want to ask a question verbally by clicking on the "hand" button, and wait for the moderator to call on you; or, type and send your question into the chat window at the bottom of the screen.     (1A12E4A)
    • For remote participants, (when everyone is muted) If you want to speak or have questions or remarks to make, please "raise your hand (virtually)" by click on the "hand button" (lower right) on the chat session page. You may speak when acknowledged by the speaker or the session moderator (again, press "*3" on your phone to unmute). Test your voice and introduce yourself first before proceeding with your remarks, please. (Please remember to click on the "hand button" again (to lower your hand) and press "*2" on your phone to mute yourself after you are done speaking.)     (1A12E5)
    • thanks to the soaphub.org folks, one can now use a jabber/xmpp client (e.g. gtalk) to join this chatroom. Just add the room as a buddy - (in our case here) <uom_20091030@soaphub.org> ... Handy for mobile devices!     (1A12E6)
  • Please note that this session may be recorded, and if so, the audio archive is expected to be made available as open content, along with the proceedings of the call to our community membership and the public at-large under our prevailing open IPR policy.     (1A12G)

Agenda     (1B)

Opening & Progress-to-Date ... (i) [ audio ] (1:06:07 ; 7.6MB)     (1B1)

Accomplishments-to-date:     (1B4)

Consensus on Scope: ... (ii) [ audio ] (2:07:23 ; 15.0MB)     (1B9)

Moving Ahead to an SDO: ... (iii) [ audio ] (2:15:15 ; 15.0MB)     (1B12)

Content Issues:     (1B14)

Workplan & Next Steps:     (1B17)

Proceedings     (1C)

Please refer to the archives above     (1C1)

===IM Chat Transcript captured during the session=== (lightly edited for clarity)     (1C2)

Peter P. Yim: Welcome to the: UoM_Ontology_Standard workshop (Face-to-Face)     (1C3)

- Fri 2009-10-30 (210C) Topic: Moving the UoM_Ontology_Standard Forward     (1C4)

Workshop Co-chair: Mr. Edward Barkmeyer (NIST), Dr. Frank Olken (NSF) & Mr. Howard Mason (BAE, ISO)     (1C5)

anonymous1 morphed into Roger Burkhart     (1C7)

anonymous morphed into Silvia Gaio     (1C8)

anonymous morphed into HansPeter_de_Koning     (1C9)

anonymous morphed into Bo Vargas (Raytheon)     (1C10)

Peter P. Yim: 8:50am EDT - session started ...     (1C11)

Peter P. Yim: participants introduced themselves     (1C12)

Peter P. Yim: Frank Olken declared the session open     (1C13)

Peter P. Yim: 8:57am - Howard Mason - presenting our "Goals"     (1C14)

Frank Olken: Frank Olken has jointed the chat room.     (1C15)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason is presenting a brief talk on our goals for the     (1C16)

Frank Olken: Howard mentioned the case of ton - which has multiple     (1C18)

definitions in differents systems of units. Worse, ton has several     (1C19)

different possible dimensionalities: ton as unit of mass, ton as unit of     (1C20)

power (for refrigeration), and ton as unit of energy (as in megatons of     (1C21)

yield for nuclear weapons.     (1C22)

Frank Olken: We are now discussing the base documents.     (1C23)

Frank Olken: VIM is available from BIPM at http://www.bipm.org. It is a     (1C24)

vocabulary for understanding units of measurements. 9:09 AM     (1C25)

Frank Olken: ISO 80000 is a now a successor to ISO 31 (SI units). 9:10 am     (1C26)

Frank Olken: UN/ECE Recommendation 20 is from UN/CEFACT. This is a     (1C27)

recommendation for use in cross border trade. 9:11 am     (1C28)

Frank Olken: QUDT was produced by Top Quadrant, for NASA Ames. 9:12     (1C29)

Chip Masters is now discussing this.     (1C30)

Frank Olken: SWEET is a large ontology created by NASA JPL. Part is     (1C31)

measurement units, in OWL DL based on .... by Unidata. It is in OWL DL.     (1C32)

09:13:00 AM     (1C33)

HansPeter_de_Koning: ISO/IEC 80000 "Quantities and units" will replace     (1C34)

both ISO 31 and IEC 60027. Currently 8 parts are released as     (1C35)

International Standard     (1C36)

Chip Masters: The QUDT draft specification and links to the ontology     (1C37)

files can be found here http://www.qudt.org     (1C38)

Frank Olken: UCUM is being adopted by HL7 and Open Geospatial Information     (1C39)

consortium. Developed by Gunther Schadow (not present).     (1C40)

Frank Olken: There is some argument about UCUM - it only considers units     (1C41)

not quantities. 9:14 am     (1C42)

HansPeter_de_Koning: One of the sources for QUDT was the March 2009     (1C43)

version of the QUDV (Quantities, Units, Dimensions and Values) model for     (1C44)

SysML RTF 1.2, provided by European Space Agency (ESA) to TopQuadrant     (1C45)

anonymous morphed into Nicola Guarino     (1C46)

Frank Olken: UnitsML originally from NIST, now an OASIS project. This is     (1C47)

intended to markup units for xml / html documents. It is an XML schema,     (1C48)

not an ontology.     (1C49)

Frank Olken: UnitsML tries to sort out units, beyond ISO, UCUM.     (1C50)

are on the line. New version is coming soon. Covers units and     (1C52)

dimensions. 9:17 am     (1C53)

Frank Olken: QUDV now has a version as an OWL ontology. Documented on the     (1C54)

OMG wiki site.     (1C55)

Chip Masters: Hans, thanks for clarifying the source SysML source for     (1C56)

Nicola Guarino: Is the shared screen working?     (1C58)

Frank Olken: 9:19am - Nicola, no we do not have the shared screen     (1C59)

working. You need to download slides directly from the web page,     (1C60)

anonymous morphed into Brand Niemann     (1C62)

Frank Olken: Welcome Brand Niemann, we are now discussing the base     (1C63)

documents.     (1C64)

Peter P. Yim: Agenda for the meeting is at:     (1C65)

009_10_30#nid22GX     (1C67)

HansPeter_de_Koning: The initial OWL version of SysML QUDV is available     (1C68)

Frank Olken: See also Quantities in OWL at http://bit.ly/2wodVR by Bijan     (1C71)

Parsia and Michael Smith, presented at OWLED 2008.     (1C72)

Peter P. Yim: On "other?" document base ... check out MikeDean's input     (1C73)

d04) and possibly something VinayChaudri of SRI may be sending us     (1C75)

Frank Olken: 9:27 am - For QUDT see the presentation at     (1C76)

Peter P. Yim: now that we realize that QUDV has an OWL ontology available,     (1C78)

and Hans-Peter de Koning has agreed to support us on this effort, our     (1C79)

OWL champions will now comprise of: Rob Raskin, Chip Masters &     (1C80)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes - CLIF suitable for normative representation,     (1C82)

rather than implementation.     (1C83)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer notes that we will likely use OWL (OWL Full? OWL     (1C84)

DL?) also.     (1C85)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer notes the possible use of UML diagrams to help     (1C86)

understand the UoM ontology. 9:32 am     (1C87)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer notes UML diagrams will not be normative.     (1C88)

Frank Olken: EdBarkemeyer - I am sure we will use OWL 2.0.     (1C89)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: we should publish as much as possible in OWL 2.0     (1C90)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: rationale for use of OWL is to get it out to the     (1C92)

Frank Olken: Also use OWL 2.0 Full when necessary.     (1C94)

Steve Ray: Bottom line, the normative version will be in CLIF, with     (1C95)

informative versions available in OWL and UML, right?     (1C96)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: The point of the CLIF version is as a reference     (1C97)

for implementors.     (1C98)

Pat Hayes: @Steve: Yes, I think that is basically right.     (1C99)

Frank Olken: Will the anonymous person please change yourself so as to     (1C100)

identify yourself. Click on settings button to do this. .....9:40 am     (1C101)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: OWL 2 is definitely better than OWL 1, i.e., more     (1C102)

expressive.     (1C103)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: We need to make it clear the users of ontology are     (1C104)

required to implement in CLIF.     (1C105)

anonymous morphed into Mark Rivas     (1C106)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: CLIF will be normative reference, will also     (1C107)

publish informative version in OWL 2 DL.     (1C108)

Pat Hayes: Frank: NOT required...     (1C109)

Frank Olken: Pat, do you mean that OWL 2 DL is not a required     (1C110)

publication?     (1C111)

Frank Olken: Hans-Peter, are there tools for publication into CLIF, e.g.,     (1C112)

syntax checkers?     (1C113)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: yes, there are parsers.     (1C114)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: There is a CLIF mail exploder to standards/tool     (1C115)

developers.     (1C116)

Frank Olken: Joel Bender: people will gravitate to the document in the     (1C117)

language they know.     (1C118)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: In SC4 that would be text files or xml.     (1C119)

Frank Olken: Steve Ray: This will help adoption (multi-lingual versions).     (1C120)

Steve Ray: The advantage is that people can stay in their comfort zones     (1C121)

regarding development environments.     (1C122)

Frank Olken: RogerBurkhardt: QUDT also uses Object Constraint Language.     (1C123)

Peter P. Yim: 9:50am EDT - review / discussion on work-in-progress (draft)     (1C124)

Roger Burkhart: The QUDV model uses the OMG Object Constraint Language     (1C125)

(OCL) in combination with UML class diagrams to express consistency and     (1C126)

derivation rules such as dimensional analysis. The greater     (1C127)

expressibility of Common Logic could be important to express such     (1C128)

internal constraints.     (1C129)

Joel Bender: As a follow up to my comment, I forgot to complete the     (1C130)

thought. When a document is presented in more than one language it     (1C131)

multiplies the amount of work that is needed to keep everything     (1C132)

consistent, and there is a danger that some constraint cannot be     (1C133)

represented in one or more of the languages. This is pretty obvious when     (1C134)

stated, but isn't always followed through very well depending on how     (1C135)

well the committee participants cooperate. Just a note of my personal     (1C136)

anxiety as the process continues.     (1C137)

Frank Olken: We are getting ready to resume the discussion here shortly     (1C138)

-10:21:00     (1C139)

HansPeter_de_Koning: @Joel: I fully agree. Ideally we should have an     (1C140)

automated way of generating alternative informative specifications,     (1C141)

avoiding dependence on human transformations.     (1C142)

Pat Hayes: @Joel: I agree this is an issue we should be aware of. Just     (1C143)

baldly publishing several 'versions' would not do the job.     (1C144)

Peter P. Yim: 10:25am EDT now going into "Scope issues"     (1C145)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer is speaking on the Scope of the Units of Measure     (1C146)

Ontology. see his slides linked from the meeeting agenda.     (1C147)

Frank Olken: First issue units of measure only, or also quantities. UCUM     (1C148)

has not quantities. NIST believes we need quantities.     (1C149)

Nicolas Rouquette: In the OMG, there is a specification called Query,     (1C150)

Views & Transformations, QVT, which provides support for specifying     (1C151)

mappings of an ontology to/from different representations in, e.g., UML,     (1C152)

OWL, RDF, etc... This approach is what the Ontology Definition Metamodel     (1C153)

(ODM) uses to specify the mappings amongst UML, OWL, RDFS and Topic     (1C154)

quantities.     (1C157)

Frank Olken: Gunther Schadow wanted only units - but he is not on the     (1C158)

Frank Olken: Nicola Guarino concurs with units + quantities, also wants     (1C160)

reference frames for coordinates, etc.     (1C161)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: by the model of quantities you mean to include     (1C162)

dimensionality. Ed Barkmeyer the VIM talks about quantities,     (1C163)

measurements, units. See David Leal's     (1C164)

Frank Olken: See DavidLeal's UML diagrams on his web page.     (1C165)

anonymous morphed into JamieClark     (1C166)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer - SI is about scalar quantities. Do we restrict     (1C167)

scope to scalar quantities.     (1C168)

Frank Olken: We need to talk about vector quantities to differentiate     (1C169)

between work and torque.     (1C170)

Frank Olken: HansPeter_de_Koning: we have a model of quantities which     (1C171)

allows tensor measurements.     (1C172)

Frank Olken: HansPeter_de_Koning: start with scalars and do tensors     (1C173)

Frank Olken: Nicolas Rouquette: Differentiating between torque and work is     (1C175)

non-trivial.     (1C176)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: We need to cover scalars, we will need to     (1C177)

extend to vectors and tensors eventually. We should start with scalars,     (1C178)

but not preclude vectors and tensors.     (1C179)

Frank Olken: EdBarkemeyer: simply create base types for vectors but do     (1C180)

not explicate them further.     (1C181)

HansPeter_de_Koning: Terminology: tensor of rank 0 is scalar; rank 1 is     (1C182)

vector; rank 2 is matrix; rank > 2 is higher order tensor     (1C183)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: We should be careful about saying that the     (1C184)

ontology defines things.     (1C185)

Joel Bender: What is the chance that some user of this work will pick the     (1C186)

wrong label, or build a derived work, that uses the wrong class? What is     (1C187)

the consequence of picking the wrong one?     (1C188)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: We are drifting in substantive issues, not just     (1C189)

scope matters. I want to return to what the scope of the ontology.     (1C190)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: We clearly need to address scalars, possibly     (1C191)

vectors, ... tensors.     (1C192)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: particular quantity is a property of a specific     (1C193)

physical object.     (1C194)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: ref to Pat Hayes, two stick both 30 cm long ==>     (1C195)

these are two different particular quantities.     (1C196)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: amount of length of the two sticks is the same     (1C197)

if both sticks are 30 cm. Do we need notion of particular quantities.     (1C198)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: we do not need particular quantities.     (1C199)

Frank Olken: HansPeter_de_Koning: we only need abstract quantities, not     (1C200)

particular quantities.     (1C201)

Frank Olken: Joe Collins: we need both notions.     (1C202)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: quantity kind is sometimes referred as     (1C203)

dimension.     (1C204)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: If these particular quantities are understood     (1C205)

strictly, e.g., "mass-of". Two different protons cannot have the same     (1C206)

mass. Are we talking     (1C207)

Frank Olken: ChipMasters's: comment on bullet 2. The degree to which we     (1C208)

need to capture the distinction between scalar, vector, tensor is     (1C209)

dependent on how detailed we want     (1C210)

Frank Olken: to model physical laws.     (1C211)

Frank Olken: JamieClark: A rough consensus on abstract quantities, but we     (1C212)

will need some notion of particular quantities.     (1C213)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: The issue we cannot get rid of is that of     (1C214)

particular measurements (with errors uncertainties).     (1C215)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: purely philosophical issue of what we want to     (1C216)

ontologize. Particular quantities are useless in the ontology.     (1C217)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: Physicists think in terms of particular     (1C218)

quantities.     (1C219)

Frank Olken: HansPeter_de_Koning: we have will have URI for quantities,     (1C220)

quantity kinds (dimensionality).     (1C221)

Frank Olken: Nicola Guarino: Pat Hayes seems to want to get rid of     (1C222)

particular quantities.     (1C223)

HansPeter_de_Koning: To be precise the definitionURI for a kind of     (1C224)

quantity or a unit will refer to the ISO/IEC 80000 normative definition     (1C225)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: one can speak about length of meeting without     (1C226)

reference to a particular measurement.     (1C227)

Pat Hayes: Nicola is correct     (1C228)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: we have identified an issue, the extent we     (1C229)

connect to external standards for quantities.     (1C230)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: We certainly need abstract quantities, unclear     (1C231)

about particular quantities.     (1C232)

Frank Olken: Pavithra: quantity is not an object, it is an attribute. It     (1C233)

has types.     (1C234)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: as designed measurement, as manufactured     (1C235)

measurement.     (1C236)

Nicolas Rouquette: Agree with Pavithra; I think that NicolaGuarino's     (1C237)

question could be stated as follows:     (1C238)

Pat Hayes: I agree with Pavritha also.     (1C239)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: kind of quantities = dimensions. The nature of     (1C240)

the thing being measured.     (1C241)

Pat Hayes: Some kinds of Q may be distinguished on other criteria than     (1C242)

dimension.     (1C243)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: quantity kinds can be subtyped: length can be     (1C244)

height, depth, width, ....     (1C245)

Frank Olken: I prefer dimensionality to quantity kind.     (1C246)

Frank Olken: Chip Masters: we need both ..., dimensionality presumes a     (1C247)

system of units ....     (1C248)

Nicolas Rouquette: 1) Temperature of a Person: this is a general property     (1C249)

in the sense that a Person is a general concept. 2) Temperature of     (1C250)

Nicola Guarino is a specialization of the property: Temperature of a     (1C251)

Person. 3) Temperature of Nicolas Rouquette is a distinct specialization     (1C252)

of the property: Temperature of a Person. 4) We can then further     (1C253)

specialize the property to narrow the context in which we want to talk     (1C254)

about such quantities as properties of things in some context. 5) A     (1C255)

measurement model (In the sense of VIM) can impose additional     (1C256)

constraints on the context in which we can say that a quantity property     (1C257)

is measurable and then talk about a measurement as another kind of     (1C258)

property about a property quantity which is a property of something.     (1C259)

Frank Olken: HansPeter_de_Koning: dimensionality presuppses choice of     (1C260)

base unit ....     (1C261)

Frank Olken: EdBarkemeyer: count is another quantity kind.     (1C262)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: we need to differntiate between quantity kind     (1C263)

and quantity role (length vs. height, width, ...)     (1C264)

HansPeter_de_Koning: According to VIM kind of quantity is NOT the same     (1C265)

as dimension - Dimension of a (kind of) quantity is the product of     (1C266)

powers of base quantities that you have selected for your system of     (1C267)

quantities     (1C268)

Frank Olken: Nicola Guarino: Two different quantities might have same     (1C269)

dimension.     (1C270)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: quantity kinds and dimension kinds     (1C271)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: dimension = quantity kind role     (1C272)

HansPeter_de_Koning: The VIM terms are "kind of quantity" and "quantity     (1C273)

dimension"     (1C274)

Pat Hayes: @Nicolas: "specialization of a quantity" isn't a very useful     (1C275)

notion, as it has no way to be cashed out in any theories of quantity     (1C276)

relations. The temperature of Nicola (at a time, as determined by an act     (1C277)

of measurement) is not a specialization of temperature, it is a *value*     (1C278)

of temperature. It is not a property at all, but an actual temperature.     (1C279)

The property *temperature of person* is formally a set of pairs <x     (1C280)

y>where x is a person and y is a temperature. We have to allow     (1C281)

temperatures in this ('abstract') sense to *exist*, and when we do, they     (1C282)

suffice to say all that we want to say.     (1C283)

Nicolas Rouquette: @PatHayes: "Temperature of Nicola" is a Tensor; this     (1C284)

property is not tied to a particular context. We can specialize this     (1C285)

tensor, e.g., to refer to the "Temperature of Nicola on Oct. 30, 2009"     (1C286)

which isn't a measurement either.     (1C287)

anonymous morphed into NSF-venue     (1C288)

Frank Olken: Dimension seems overloaded. Dimension in physics seems to     (1C289)

mean quantity kind. Dimension in engineering is a role (e.g., height,     (1C290)

Frank Olken: JamieClark: we should defer further discussion to     (1C292)

substantive phase of the project.     (1C293)

Frank Olken: Nicolas Rouquette: We need to tie our concepts to standards,     (1C294)

standard termionologies, e.g., VIM.     (1C295)

Pat Hayes: @Nicolas: OK, you beat me. I have no idea what you are talking     (1C296)

about. HOwever, *temperature of nicola* is certainly not a tensor in     (1C297)

CLIF, OWL or any ontology formalism I know of.     (1C298)

Frank Olken: Chip Masters: dimensionality = systems dimension (dependent     (1C301)

on systems of measure)     (1C302)

Nicolas Rouquette: I said that, ideally, the UOM should really be an     (1C303)

ontology of VIM and nothing else. VIM has the benefit of having been     (1C304)

thoroughly vetted and reviewed in the scientific community for,     (1C305)

literally, hundreds of years.     (1C306)

Joe Collins: "quantity dimension" is well defined, "dimension" is not     (1C307)

Frank Olken: Peter P. Yim: We should stick to the VIM as closely as possible.     (1C308)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: Chapter I conflates two notions of quantity     (1C309)

(Ch. I of VIM). VIM was written by physicists not engineer.     (1C310)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: We will to model systems of quantities.     (1C311)

Nicolas Rouquette: Ed: could you specifically point to where VIM is     (1C312)

ambiguous or conflicting about the notion of quantity?     (1C313)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: Will we model any other systems than SI?     (1C314)

Nicolas Rouquette: QUDV in SysML 1.2 allows you to define your own system     (1C315)

of units, whether it is a subset of SI, a superset, overlaps with SI or     (1C316)

is completely different.     (1C317)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: We will model systems of quantities. Will we     (1C318)

model any other systems of measurement within this ontology.     (1C319)

Nicolas Rouquette: Similarly, QUDV in SysML 1.2 allows you to define your     (1C320)

own system of quantities; there is no constraint that says that one has     (1C321)

to use all of ISQ.     (1C322)

Nicolas Rouquette: (ISQ = Int. System of Quantities, which is part of     (1C323)

ISO/IEC 80000)     (1C324)

Frank Olken: Chip Masters: we certainly want to model SI, perhaps other     (1C325)

systems if folks need them. Also possibly use other systems to     (1C326)

illustrate concepts from ontology.     (1C327)

Peter P. Yim: Hans-Peter, you are putting music onto our phone line ...     (1C328)

please do not put your phone on hold     (1C329)

Frank Olken: Some from European Space Agency has put us on hold and is     (1C330)

paying music. Please do not do this.     (1C331)

HansPeter_de_Koning: Apologies! I had a call on my second line...     (1C332)

Frank Olken: EdBarkmeyers: We are discussing systems of quantities (not     (1C333)

yet systems of units).     (1C334)

Peter P. Yim: thank you, Hans-Peter     (1C335)

Pat Hayes: @Hans-Peter: it was very entertaining.     (1C336)

Frank Olken: NicolasRoquette: QUDV can handle multiple systems of     (1C337)

quantities.     (1C338)

Frank Olken: Some systems of quantities (SI) use current as a base     (1C339)

dimension and then charge = current * time. Other systems use charge as     (1C340)

base dimension, and current = charge / time.     (1C341)

Peter P. Yim: @NicolaGuarino - could you document the point you just made on     (1C342)

this chat board, please     (1C343)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: To what extent we cover other systems of     (1C344)

quantities than SI?     (1C345)

Frank Olken: Chip Masters: Charge = sqrt of force (via Coulomb's Law)     (1C346)

Frank Olken: EdBarkmeyers: Do we cover derived quantities as come     (1C347)

computation over base quantities? Does anyone disagree?     (1C348)

Nicolas Rouquette: I think we need to review the SysML QUDV in the     (1C349)

context of this discussion. We already covered the problems of other     (1C350)

systems of units/quantities and the support for dimensional analysis,     (1C351)

coherence and derivation.     (1C352)

Frank Olken: Chip Masters: I disagree, this would requite an ontology of     (1C353)

operators.     (1C354)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: We could have an incomplete model of derivations.     (1C356)

Frank Olken: NicolasRoquette: Both VIM and QUDV include derivations of     (1C358)

derived units.     (1C359)

Frank Olken: NicolasRoquette: VIM and QUDV differentiate between quantity     (1C360)

kinds and dimenisonality.     (1C361)

Nicolas Rouquette: @Frank: My name is spelled Rouquette, not Roquette.     (1C362)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: Derived units are within scope. Details to be     (1C363)

determined.     (1C364)

Frank Olken: Pavithra: record system of units explicitly.     (1C365)

HansPeter_de_Koning: The SysML QUDV contains a full OCL algorithm that     (1C366)

specifies how to automatically derive the quantity dimension for any     (1C367)

(kind of) quantity that is defined within a system of quantities. The     (1C368)

system of quantities defines its base quantities. One individual system     (1C369)

of quantities can represent the ISQ (International System of     (1C370)

Quantities).     (1C371)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: We need to model systems of units explicitly.     (1C372)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: Which units go into ontology. Clearly need SI     (1C373)

base units? do we add joules? what about metric prefixes? do we add all     (1C374)

of these derived units? on do we rely on a library of derived units?     (1C375)

Frank Olken: Joe Collins: cgs units are not part of SI. Include SI named     (1C376)

units, metric prefixes?     (1C377)

Frank Olken: HansPeter_de_Koning: separate out derived units     (1C378)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: I agree - put derived units in a library, not core     (1C379)

ontology.     (1C380)

HansPeter_de_Koning: To be precise I would separate the basic concepts     (1C381)

in a base ontology, then create a second ISQ/SI ontology the imports the     (1C382)

base ontology and adds the most important ISQ/SI quantities and units     (1C383)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: there are libraries out there ... Do we assume     (1C384)

that libraries will become published extensions? What about UCUM? But     (1C385)

they are not ontologies ....     (1C386)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: Scope will include how to do extensions.     (1C387)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: rule based registry or explicit choice     (1C388)

maintenance authority?     (1C389)

Frank Olken: EdBarkemeyer: Need a model of unit derviation.     (1C390)

Frank Olken: I agree with Ed on unit derivation.     (1C391)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: we will not formalize real arithmetic in OWL,     (1C392)

likely not in Common Logic.     (1C393)

Frank Olken: HansPeter_de_Koning: We specify explicilty dimensionsal     (1C394)

analysis in QUDV - including derivation of derived units and quantities.     (1C395)

Frank Olken: Roger Burkhart: We only do simple derivations, expect we will     (1C396)

need to support unit conversion.     (1C397)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: Are scales within scope: ratio scales (length,     (1C398)

time) Absolute scales (mass, temperature)?     (1C399)

Frank Olken: Yes, I think so.     (1C400)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: What about Rockwell Hardness?     (1C401)

Frank Olken: HansPeter_de_Koning: We included absolute scales in QUDV. It     (1C402)

is essential for many engineering applications.     (1C403)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: should ontology include general notion of scales     (1C404)

and situate SI within this framework?     (1C405)

Frank Olken: Nicola Guarino: We will need scales.     (1C406)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: We cannot avoid scales.     (1C407)

Frank Olken: Nicola Guarino: What about inverse properties such as     (1C408)

resistance and conductance ...     (1C409)

Peter P. Yim: @Nicola - can you give us the name of the book you cited     (1C410)

again, please     (1C411)

Nicola Guarino: Albert Tarantola: Elements for Physics: Quantities,     (1C412)

Qualities, and Intrinsic Theories     (1C413)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: we need a general framework for scales.     (1C414)

Ravi Sharma: Nicola Guarino: The answer lies in physics and not in the     (1C415)

units alone, as there could be different ways of measuring conductance     (1C416)

and also resistance and it need not always add to unity as there are     (1C417)

errors in measurements and different micro processes are invloves.     (1C418)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: What about nonlinear scales - logarithmic, e.g     (1C419)

sound intensity in decibels.     (1C420)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: what about scales such as rockwell hardness.     (1C421)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: It is just a partial order.     (1C422)

Frank Olken: Actually, it is a total ordering.     (1C423)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: Do we model unit conversions?     (1C424)

Frank Olken: Evan Wallace: Yes, otherwise we are wasting our time.     (1C425)

Frank Olken: Steve Ray: Chip Masters was concerned with the mathematical     (1C427)

operators needed.     (1C428)

Ravi Sharma: Evan Wallace: Yes or else there will be no communication     (1C429)

between the different measurement systems.     (1C430)

Frank Olken: chipMasters: We all want unit conversions.     (1C431)

Frank Olken: Chip Masters: we need to model logarithmic functions.     (1C432)

Nicolas Rouquette: Earlier, someone expressed a concern about scoping how     (1C433)

much of "scales" do we want to tackle. I think that focusing first on     (1C434)

the notions of scales for which we can provide value-added reasoning     (1C435)

support (e.g., Hans-Peter mentioned automated conversion) is a good way     (1C436)

to force ourselves to limit the scope to what we can reason about.     (1C437)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason; no dissent on need for units conversion     (1C438)

modelling within the ontology.     (1C439)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: do we model particular quantities and     (1C440)

measurements? in first draft?     (1C441)

Ravi Sharma: Chip Masters: The scale of conversion or accuracy does not     (1C442)

matter but affects accuracy of measurement whether linear, log, and     (1C443)

often with limits including singularities.     (1C444)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: The physicists are excited about particular     (1C445)

measurements.     (1C446)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: This threatens to take us into the realms of     (1C447)

other standards.     (1C448)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: We need particular quantities for the standard to     (1C449)

be useful. Perhaps we can partially specify this.     (1C450)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: Include in scope some discussion of measured     (1C451)

values ...     (1C452)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: TC 213 does tolerance and uncertainty. Do we     (1C453)

model tolerances? This has significant commercial significance.     (1C454)

Nicola Guarino: I have to go now, bybye everybody. Nice discussion!     (1C455)

Frank Olken: Steve Ray: We need to differentiate measurement uncertainty     (1C456)

and specification tolerance (descriptive, vs. prescriptive).     (1C457)

Frank Olken: Steve Ray: Can we avoid prescriptive notions of tolerance?     (1C458)

Frank Olken: Steve Ray: Tolerances and measurement uncertainty are     (1C459)

separable issues.     (1C460)

Frank Olken: I favor defering issues to tolerances.     (1C461)

Frank Olken: Evan Wallace: This is an artificial distinction. this is     (1C462)

problematic for commerce.     (1C463)

Frank Olken: HansPeter_de_Koning: We should limit discuss of tolerance.     (1C464)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: We will not consider tolerances in first     (1C465)

Frank Olken: No consensus about measurement uncertainty.     (1C467)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer will not include either measurement uncertainty     (1C468)

or tolerance within first version.     (1C469)

Frank Olken: EdBarkemeyer: Should we divide the ontology into modules?     (1C470)

Yes? Unclear, how?     (1C471)

Pat Hayes: For the record, tolerance is easy, but uncertainty and     (1C472)

probability is new territory for formalization in ontology languages, so     (1C473)

we risk being too ambitious.     (1C474)

Frank Olken: OWL 2 is working on modularization. CLIF?     (1C475)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: Yes, CLIF has modularization scheme, including     (1C476)

restricting scope of existential quantities.     (1C477)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: We want modularization.     (1C478)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: module import is transtive     (1C479)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: Explicit microtheories - possibly inconsistent     (1C480)

with each other?     (1C481)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: Names can mean different things within     (1C482)

metatheories. This is risky within a standard.     (1C483)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: You can get something similar by subscripting     (1C484)

names with contexts in common logic.     (1C485)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: We do not want full CYC microtheories - e.g.,     (1C486)

multiple meanings for names within microtheories.     (1C487)

Pat Hayes: metatheory//microtheory     (1C488)

Frank Olken: EdBarkmeyers: Should we include guidance for how to do     (1C489)

extensions to this standard? Yes !!!     (1C490)

Pat Hayes: Yes, as far as we can.     (1C491)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: relationship to other standards efforts? UCUM?     (1C492)

Pat Hayes: HOw can a mere mortal like myself get hold of a readable copy     (1C494)

of iso 80000 ?     (1C495)

Nicolas Rouquette: You can find VIM and various publications related to     (1C496)

ISO/IEC 80000 here:     (1C497)

Frank Olken: HansPeter_de_Koning: Use NIST document on treatment of     (1C499)

English units as example for how to do extensions.     (1C500)

Frank Olken: Jerry Smith: When we get to 80 percent, publish!     (1C501)

Frank Olken: Nicolas Rouquette: We need to know where the repository will     (1C502)

how, implications for intellectual property.     (1C503)

HansPeter_de_Koning: NIST document SP 811     (1C504)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: This closes scope discussion.     (1C506)

Peter P. Yim: 12:29pm - lunch break     (1C507)

Joel Bender: Is the conference line staying open?     (1C508)

Frank Olken: We will resume at 1:15 PM, 17:15 PM UK, 18:15 Europeans time     (1C509)

- i.e., 45 minutes.     (1C510)

Peter P. Yim: 1:19pm - back in session     (1C511)

Pat Hayes: Ed: do we have a referenceable summary of what we agreed this     (1C512)

Frank Olken: We have resumed the meeting.     (1C515)

Frank Olken: We are now discussing the standardization strategy.     (1C516)

Frank Olken: It appears that we use OASIS as the base Standards     (1C517)

Development Organization.     (1C518)

Frank Olken: OASIS will accommodate a variety of file formats including     (1C519)

xml, xhtml.     (1C520)

Frank Olken: After OASIS standard would be forwarded to ISO (or possibly     (1C521)

JamieClark: Or both; issue of where to submit will be for the committee     (1C523)

once the have a final OASIS Standard product.     (1C524)

JamieClark: Every submission has a time and strategy tax, though, so     (1C525)

that'll be easier to evaluate once underway. In any case, OASIS makes     (1C526)

those submissions.     (1C527)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: Unhappy at the prospect of falling into the     (1C528)

clutches of the W3C.     (1C529)

Frank Olken: Pat Hayes: I am guessing that W3C will pass.....     (1C530)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: We want to avoid going through more than one     (1C531)

standardization process.     (1C532)

Frank Olken: Joel Bender: during the standards development process the     (1C533)

draft documents will be available on the TRAC server ...     (1C534)

Frank Olken: JamieClark: We will need a copy of the standards drafts on     (1C535)

the OASIS server (even the working documents).     (1C536)

Frank Olken: JamieClark: OASIS also has site for email for standards     (1C537)

development.     (1C538)

Frank Olken: JamieClark: Many XML based projects have run aground on XML     (1C539)

tools issues.     (1C540)

Frank Olken: Nicolas Rouqette: How will you coordinate with OMG on QUDV?     (1C541)

I would like to avoid duplication of work with SysML, the creation of     (1C542)

similar but different standards.     (1C543)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: The committee will establish coordinating     (1C544)

processes     (1C545)

JamieClark: OASIS rules permit use of properly administered outside     (1C546)

tools for hosting functions we don't carry out internally.     (1C547)

Frank Olken: NicolasRoquette: Andrew Watson at OMG is the right person     (1C548)

for coordination of OMG and OASIS work.     (1C549)

Frank Olken: JamieClark: Show the SysML the charter, ask if they want to     (1C550)

be involved with the creation of the UML model for UoM ontology.     (1C551)

JamieClark: Joel: Talk to our Mary McRae, she's the authority on     (1C552)

approval of TC use of outside resources. And, as it happens, a CMS     (1C553)

expert. Mary.mcrae [at] oasis-open.org     (1C554)

Frank Olken: Roger Burkhart: I do not see problems of coordinating the OMG     (1C556)

and OASIS work.     (1C557)

Frank Olken: Roger Burkhart: I chair the SysML revision group.     (1C558)

Frank Olken: Roger Burkhart: Original SysML submitters gave very     (1C559)

permissive license.     (1C560)

Frank Olken: Nicolas Rouquette: We have used ODM mappings to translate     (1C561)

to/from UML, Owl.     (1C562)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: No dissent on use of OASIS as the vehicle for     (1C563)

this ontology standard.     (1C564)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: Let us start discussion of the charter of the     (1C565)

standards group.     (1C566)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: Proposed name: QUOMOS: Quantity and Units of     (1C567)

Measure Ontology Standard     (1C568)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: Do we include usage rules in the standard?     (1C569)

Nicolas Rouquette: Ed, are you saying that you don't like SysML? I'm     (1C571)

Joel Bender: (there is a quite a bit of discussion that is difficult to     (1C573)

hear on the conference call)     (1C574)

Frank Olken: I think we should avoid business rules - as too politically     (1C575)

sensitive.     (1C576)

Frank Olken: Goal is electronic open-access document.     (1C577)

Frank Olken: OASIS: non-asssertion regime. Membership in the TC waives     (1C578)

your rights to content of standard.     (1C579)

Frank Olken: Intended users: development of information models     (1C580)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: Also document markup developers     (1C581)

Frank Olken: Also data exchange markup developers.     (1C582)

Frank Olken: Evan: You skipped over a section on "dimensions". We need to     (1C583)

be clear about quantity kind.     (1C584)

Frank Olken: Language for conducting business: English.     (1C585)

Frank Olken: Various standards to coordinate: UnitsML, BIPM, ISO 80000,     (1C586)

Frank Olken: Evan Wallace: I do not see Recommendation 20 on here. I am     (1C587)

concerned that it might be constraining. I am glad to see it omitted     (1C588)

Frank Olken: Do we need a heartbeat - a regular working draft     (1C590)

publication?     (1C591)

anonymous1 morphed into Hajo Rijgersberg     (1C592)

Frank Olken: JamieClark: forward standard to ISO in charter?     (1C593)

Frank Olken: Draft title of standard: Quantity and Unit of Measure     (1C595)

Ontology Standard (QUOMOS)     (1C596)

Frank Olken: NIST (is a member of OASIS) and will support the standard.     (1C597)

Frank Olken: Peter P. Yim (is an individual member of OASIS) and will support     (1C598)

the standard development.     (1C599)

Frank Olken: BAE will suport the standard and is a member of OASIS.     (1C600)

Frank Olken: NicolasRoquette (JPL) will support.     (1C601)

Frank Olken: NSF is not a member of OASIS.     (1C602)

Frank Olken: Roger Burkhart (John Deere) is not a member.     (1C603)

Frank Olken: Eurostep may support this.     (1C604)

Frank Olken: OMG is not a member of OASIS.     (1C605)

Frank Olken: NIST, JPL, BAE?, CMU?, Eurostep, LBNL?, --- we need to get     (1C606)

approval of primary OASIS members.     (1C607)

Frank Olken: DOD DISA is a member of OASIS, could also endorse the     (1C608)

standard.     (1C609)

Frank Olken: Schedule for first meeting?     (1C610)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: I am estimating mid-January, 2010 for first     (1C611)

meeting. Mostly teleconference.     (1C612)

Frank Olken: JamieClark: First meeting is likely to be just a     (1C614)

teleconference.     (1C615)

Peter P. Yim: @JamieClark - OASIS should request from ISO a copy of the     (1C616)

latest ISO/IEC 80000 standard for the purpose of this development (to     (1C617)

Mike Smith of ISO) with the understanding that this will be put into a     (1C618)

password protected shared file workspace for this working group     (1C619)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: OASIS needs to request of Mike Smith a copy of     (1C620)

ISO 80000 for purposes of the ontology std development.     (1C621)

Frank Olken: We will resume in 5 minutes.     (1C623)

Frank Olken: We are reconvening now.     (1C624)

HansPeter_de_Koning: I am back on-line and in the audio conference     (1C625)

Frank Olken: We are trying to schedule a teleconference (perhaps a part     (1C626)

of Ontolog Forum) to discuss QUOMOS project.     (1C627)

Frank Olken: Yim: we will have teleconference to finalize QUOMOS charter     (1C628)

on Nov. 19, 2009. Thursday - see developing session details     (1C629)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: We need all contributions, and names of     (1C631)

sponsoring persons, organizations within OASIS by Nov. 16, 2009.     (1C632)

Frank Olken: We now need a convenor for the mid-January 2010 - First OASIS QUOMOS TC meeting.     (1C633)

[ subsequent post: 14-Jan-2010 is a Thursday, and could be a candidate date     (1C635)

for that meeting. -PeterYim ]     (1C636)

Frank Olken: We now need a list of deliverables to go into the charter.     (1C637)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: A bunch of modules, each in CLIF, derived OWL 2     (1C638)

DL, UML pictures, explanatory English text.     (1C639)

Frank Olken: Modules will be quantities, units, and scales. Optional     (1C640)

units on measurement uncertainty, tolerances.     (1C641)

Frank Olken: I may be able to participate as a representative of OASIS     (1C642)

member LBNL.     (1C643)

Frank Olken: Deliverables: we will produce xxxx initially. We may produce     (1C644)

xxx modules later.     (1C645)

Frank Olken: We will start with SI base, and extension mechanism.     (1C646)

Frank Olken: Ed Barkmeyer: Quantities, Units of Measure, Scales, SI base     (1C647)

units, Derived Units, ... modules     (1C648)

Frank Olken: Maybe also a module called Dimensions.     (1C649)

Frank Olken: A core set of modules covering quantities, units of measure,     (1C650)

scales, SI base units, Derived Units, Dimensions, and Extension     (1C651)

mechanism.     (1C652)

Hajo Rijgersberg: How about measures? And how about quantity kinds? Are     (1C653)

they regarded as separate concepts or as classification of quantities?     (1C654)

Peter P. Yim: (about an hour ago) Hajo Rijgersberg sent in his input about     (1C655)

scope (and more) in a message at:     (1C656)

Frank Olken: Eachmodule shall include: CLIF, OWL @ DL,     (1C658)

HansPeter_de_Koning: I think my line is muted from your side?     (1C659)

Hajo Rijgersberg: I'm sorry, people, I should have sent it earlier.     (1C660)

Something went wrong with starting time interpretation here...     (1C661)

Joel Bender: (it is very difficult to hear, there is still an office     (1C662)

conversation obliterating the conference)     (1C663)

Frank Olken: Hans Peter, We seem to be getting background noise from your     (1C664)

HansPeter_de_Koning: I will try to reconnect...     (1C666)

Frank Olken: Howard Mason: The TC will plan to meet every 2 weeks.     (1C667)

Frank Olken: The standard will be known as Quantities and Units of     (1C668)

Measure Ontology Standard (QUOMOS). There was consensus on this.     (1C669)

Frank Olken: Who is editing the charter? Howard Mason can finish the week     (1C670)

of Nov. 16. Ed Barkmeyer can mark up the wiki in the meantime.     (1C671)

Hajo Rijgersberg: Why restrict the title of the standard to quantities     (1C672)

and units? There is so much more. Doesn't the term "unit" cover what can     (1C673)

be called "the domain of units"?     (1C674)

Pat Hayes: Hajo, I think the title isnt meant to be proscriptive, only a     (1C675)

general indication.     (1C676)

Frank Olken: Dimensions are within scope, just not in the title.     (1C677)

Frank Olken: Any other items of business?     (1C678)

Pat Hayes: However, QUODMOS is kind of cute....     (1C679)

Peter P. Yim: Ed Barkmeyer suggest we poll everyone on their OASIS membership     (1C681)

status. Peter to put request on the uom mailing list ... we don't want     (1C682)

to lose anyone!     (1C683)

Peter P. Yim: Great session ... thank you everyone ... audio recording and     (1C684)

chat transcript will be posted tomorrow.     (1C685)

Peter P. Yim: Appreciations to Frank Olken and NSF for hosting us today!     (1C686)

-- session ended: 2009.10.30 - 15:30 EDT --     (1C687)

  • Further Questions & Follow-up: - please post them to the [ uom-ontology-std ] listserv     (1C688)
    • if you are already subscribed, post to <uom-ontology-std [at] ontolog.cim3.net>     (1C688A)
    • (if you are not yet subscribed) you may subscribe yourself to the [ uom-ontology-std ] listserv listserv, by sending a blank email to <uom-ontology-std-join [at] ontolog.cim3.net> from your subscribing email address, and then follow the instructions you receive back from the mailing list system.     (1C688B)
  • Mark your calendars and come join us at the next virtual session for this working group - UoM_Ontology_Standard/ConferenceCall_2009_11_19     (1C689)
  • we shall look forward to those who are interested to support this effort to consider joining us at the developing OASIS QUOMOS TC - watch out for the announcement of its formation from both OASIS and ONTOLOG     (1C690)

Audio Recording of the Workshop Sessions     (1D)

  • To download the recorded segments of the workshop, click on the respective audio link under the archives section     (1D1)
    • individual recording segment are linked to from each of the agenda items above     (1D1A)
    • the playback of the audio files require the proper setup, and an MP3 compatible player on your computer.     (1D1B)
  • Conference Date and Time: 30-Oct-2009 8:50am~3:30pm EDT     (1D2)
  • Total Duration of Recordings: 5 Hour 29 Minutes - (i) 1:06:07 ; (ii) 2:07:23 ; (iii) 2:15:15     (1D3)
  • Total Recording File Size: 37.6 MB (in mp3 format) - (i) 7.6; (ii) 15.0; (iii) 15.0 MB     (1D4)
  • suggestions:     (1D5)
    • its best that you listen to the session while having the respective slide presentations (when available) opened on your desktop in front of you. You'll be prompted to advance slides by the speaker.     (1D5A)
  • ... *my apologies for the "echos" in quite a portion of the audio recording ... I was away from my normal recording equipment and settings, and evidently, still has issues doing it right while on the road. Anyhow, I am glad the audio archive is still quite intelligible! =ppy/2009.11.01     (1D6)

Resources     (1E)


For the records ...     (1E8)

How To Join Remotely (while the session is in progress)     (1F)

Attendees     (1G)

On-site Participants     (1G1)

Remote Participants     (1G2)


This page has been migrated from the OntologWiki - Click here for original page     (1G2M)