Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

missing or erroneous SI units in unitDictionary #139

Closed
mbjones opened this issue Mar 12, 2017 · 5 comments
Closed

missing or erroneous SI units in unitDictionary #139

mbjones opened this issue Mar 12, 2017 · 5 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug
Milestone

Comments

@mbjones
Copy link
Contributor

@mbjones mbjones commented Mar 12, 2017


Author Name: Margaret O'Brien (Margaret O'Brien)
Original Redmine Issue: 1605, https://projects.ecoinformatics.org/ecoinfo/issues/1605
Original Date: 2004-06-16
Original Assignee: Matt Jones


  1. The SI-derived unit "steradian" (sr) appears to be missing. it describes a
    solid angle, and is the 3-dimensional equivalent of "radian". I dont believe it
    can be described in terms of any other unit.

  2. the "waveNumber" unit is more correctly called reciprocalMeter (m-1), and
    waveNumber is one of the measurements expressed by this unit (ie, waveNumber=the
    number of wave cycles in 1 meter). Other measurements which are expressed in m-1
    include absorbance, scattering and transmittance.

  3. the unit "kilogramPerCubicMeter" is named inconsistently. It seems that it
    should be plural, ie kilogramsPerCubicMeter. This is consistent with other unit
    names (milligramsPerCubicMeter) and also how it is referenced as a ParentSI
    attribute.

@mbjones

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@mbjones mbjones commented Mar 12, 2017


Original Redmine Comment
Author Name: Matt Jones (Matt Jones)
Original Date: 2004-06-22T19:53:36Z


Thanks for the comments. I'm not sure that renaming units is a great idea
because it strands existing EML documents that use those units. That said, your
comments do indicate a need for more consistent naming. I'll target this at EML
2.1.0 and hope we can resolve these issues along with other 'units repository'
issues as partially described in bug 1000 and on the eml-dev mailing list archives.

@mbjones

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@mbjones mbjones commented Mar 12, 2017


Original Redmine Comment
Author Name: Matt Jones (Matt Jones)
Original Date: 2004-09-02T16:38:20Z


Changing QA contact to the list for all current EML bugs so that people can
track what is happening.

@mbjones

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@mbjones mbjones commented Mar 12, 2017


Original Redmine Comment
Author Name: Redmine Admin (Redmine Admin)
Original Date: 2013-03-27T21:17:40Z


Original Bugzilla ID was 1605

@mbjones

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@mbjones mbjones commented Mar 12, 2017


Original Redmine Comment
Author Name: Matt Jones (Matt Jones)
Original Date: 2014-10-14T22:45:16Z


Status update: The unit naming inconsistency described in this bug was not fixed in EML 2.1.1 in order to maintain backwards compatibility. In general, we deemed that the names were not critical because they map to a precise STMML definition, so it is trivial to determine if two units are identical. Therefore, we don't plan on removing units with names that deviate from the naming convention. But there would be no harm in adding new units that are named following the conventions and provide a duplicate unit. There hasn't been a major request for this yet. Nor has there been a major need for additional units as people can define their own units in STMML.

@mbjones mbjones added this to TODO in EML 2.2.0 Release Mar 12, 2017
@mbjones mbjones added bug and removed Status: In Progress labels Mar 12, 2017
@mbjones mbjones moved this from TODO to High priority in EML 2.2.0 Release Apr 22, 2017
@mbjones mbjones removed the Category: eml label Jul 24, 2017
@mbjones mbjones added the next label Oct 30, 2017
@mobb mobb added in progress and removed next labels Apr 30, 2018
@mobb

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@mobb mobb commented Jun 29, 2018

done, deprecated

@mobb mobb closed this Jun 29, 2018
@gothub gothub removed the in progress label Jun 29, 2018
@mobb mobb moved this from High priority to In progress in EML 2.2.0 Release Jul 12, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
3 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.