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

OBOE needs documentation, and maybe guidelines for use and extension #11

Open
mobb opened this issue Jul 11, 2017 · 1 comment
Open

Comments

@mobb
Copy link
Contributor

mobb commented Jul 11, 2017

at a minimum, to know when [something] needs to be added to oboe, and when it belongs in the extension.
today, looking at Standard. Of the subclasses (CategoricalStandard, Index, Unit), it appears to be difficult to know what to do when none of these is a perfect fit.

Example (today) eg, class ECSO_ 000012317 "Tag Number" was given this axiom: measuresUsingStandard only 'count unit'
This is wrong, because "count unit" is a quantification, but a "tag number" is not a quantity. I suspect this is because instructions are not clear enough.

@mbjones
Copy link
Member

mbjones commented Jul 12, 2017

Interesting, @mobb. The subclasses of standard might be exhaustive as they stand, but certainly worth discussion. All MeasuredCharacteristic instances would one of 1) physical quantities (in the NIST sense) that would be measured with a standard that is a Unit (e.g., in Meters); or 2) classification data that would be measured with a Standard that defines its values in terms of a CategoricalStandard -- these can be unordered (nominal) (e.g., Male) or ordered (ordinal) categories (e.g., High); or 3) numerical quantities that are not strictly physical quantities but that have some of the properties of a physical quantity, such as values that have magnitudes that can be compared (e.g., ShannonDiversity or the RichterScale). These three classes of Standard are disjoint, and arguably may be an exhaustive typology with respect to MeasuredCharacteristic values.

In your case, the question is what is the appropriate Standard for IdentifyingCharacteristic values such as Identifier, TagNumber, and Name that are assigned rather than measured. One could argue that all such labels that are assigned are simply values defined under a Standard that has no further definition because there is no way to further interpret the value. Alternatively, one could argue that IdentifyingCharacteristic values are not measured responses at all, and so instead either don't have a Standard or have a new Standard that would need to be added, such as NameStandard or IdentifierStandard.

Let's discuss with @mpsaloha.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants