Re: [Obo-unit] beginning work on unit ontology

[Alan R. <ala...@gm...>]

I suppose I should say a few more words of introduction.

The theory is that units are information artifacts, generically
dependent continuants, associated with ways of measuring, ways of
recombining them, and created by defined processes. Many of the
processes are those carried out by standards bodies.

So this representation of UO includes some standards organizations, a
number of standards processes, particularly those by which the SI
units are defined. Organizations, planned processes, data
transformations are based on the OBI ontology. Information artifacts,
are defined in IAO. While I'm working on this I'm just pulling in
selected terms from these ontologies. However everything is placed
within BFO.

The primary axis for classification is what the unit measures and this
is currently the only asserted parenthood. The base versus derived
unit asserted hierarchy in the current UO is no longer asserted but
there are defined classes that bring back some of this - a class for
SI base units, for example, defined as those units that come out of a
certain process. Other defined classes can be added, the class of
prefixed units, or those which are not SI, etc.

If you are viewing this in P4 you'll need to remember to look at the
instances tab - since many of the terms are instances. The best view
is the "individuals by inferred type" view, which I add to the
individuals tab.

-Alan

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:09 PM, Alan Ruttenberg
<ala...@gm...> wrote:
> For comment.
>
> Not all units are in.
> I haven't hooked up processes to define "derived" or "prefixed" units,
> but the processes are defined now.
> I haven't moved the unit_of relations in yet. They require review.
>
> Attached.
>
> You need to reason over it to see what it looks like. Don't use fact++
> - it exercises a bug. (bug reported and acknowledged).
>
> You can see if this viewer works for you
> http://ashby.csail.mit.edu/treeview/unit.html
>
> -Alan
>