Changed definitions of Compose units

[NormanZielke]

Summary of the discussion

Moved and updated definitions of composed units:
megawatt-hour
gigawatt-hour
terawatt-hour
petawatt-hour

Type of change (CHANGELOG.md)

Update

• Updated definitions:
  megawatt-hour , gigawatt-hour, terawatt-hour , petawatt-hour
• #1830

Workflow checklist

Automation

Closes #1830

PR-Assignee

• 🐙 Follow the Pull Request Workflow
• 📝 Update the CHANGELOG.md
• 📙 Add #'s to term tracker item

Reviewer

• 🐙 Follow the Reviewer Guide
• 🐙 Provided feedback and show sufficient appreciation for the work done

[l-emele]

The file oeo.omn should not change. Please move your changes to oeo-physical.

[stap-m]

The file oeo.omn should not change. Please move your changes to oeo-physical.

Here's a wiki article on how to do that easyly (instead of oeo-import-edits choose oeo-physical...)

[NormanZielke]

I moved my changes from oeo.omn to oeo-physical.

[l-emele]

Now some classes do not have any SubClassOf axioms. From a strictly ontological view that is fine, however that causes some problems on the OEP (e.g. the OEO viewer cannot display these properly). So could you please reinclude for the equivalent classes:

    SubClassOf:
                <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UO_1000223>

The rest of the implementation looks fine.

Should we also add the equivalence axioms for the UO class kilowatt-hour in the file oeo-import-edits.owl? @stap-m : What do you think?

[NormanZielke]

Sry for the delay. I added the SubClassOf axioms for:
megawatt-hour
gigawatt-hour
terawatt-hour
petawatt-hour
Now we have:
Equvalent To watt-hour based unit
and
SubClass Of watt-hour based unit
for every new composed unit.

As @l-emele already noted:
for kilowatt-hour equivalence axioms are still missing.

[stap-m]

I just noticed, that we have already this annotation: http://www.geneontology.org/formats/oboInOwl#hasExactSynonym "MWh"
However, we agreed on using http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/IAO_0000118. I'd either change the axion, or add alternanative label MWh on top.

[stap-m]

Should we also add the equivalence axioms for the UO class kilowatt-hour in the file oeo-import-edits.owl? @stap-m : What do you think?

I am ok with that, don't have a strong opinion, though.

[l-emele]

I just noticed, that we have already this annotation: http://www.geneontology.org/formats/oboInOwl#hasExactSynonym "MWh"
However, we agreed on using http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/IAO_0000118. I'd either change the axion, or add alternanative label MWh on top.

We agreed to use (in line with UO) has exact synoym for unit abbreviations. See e.g. use in exajoule, gigajoule, metric ton, ton of oil equivalent and various others.

[stap-m]

I just noticed, that we have already this annotation: http://www.geneontology.org/formats/oboInOwl#hasExactSynonym "MWh"
However, we agreed on using http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/IAO_0000118. I'd either change the axion, or add alternanative label MWh on top.

We agreed to use (in line with UO) has exact synoym for unit abbreviations. See e.g. use in exajoule, gigajoule, metric ton, ton of oil equivalent and various others.

Ok. Do we have a documentation for this/such decisions?
We'll have to check with OEKG that MWh and other units will be found anyway. FYI @adelmemariani

[l-emele]

Ok. Do we have a documentation for this/such decisions?

I searched yesterday a bit in the wiki, but found nothing. It is probably in one of our many oeo dev meeting protocols.
We definitely should document more general decisions, design patterns and so on.

[stap-m]

Ok. Do we have a documentation for this/such decisions?

I searched yesterday a bit in the wiki, but found nothing. It is probably in one of our many oeo dev meeting protocols. We definitely should document more general decisions, design patterns and so on.

We talked about that in the oeo-dev-meeting today, see meeting notes. I think this PR is not touched directly by the discussion.

[stap-m]

@NormanZielke can you finish this PR please.

[NormanZielke]

I addressed the requested changes of @l-emele. I noticed that every composed unit has the axiom has ExactSynonym and its specific unit abbreviations, which is what i understood you wanted to see.
I understand that no more changes to make. If that is the case @stap-m , I go on and finish this PR, but someone need to approve this PR.

[NormanZielke]

I resolved the remaining conflicts with my new branch. I only need a review approve from @l-emele .

[stap-m]

The requested changes were made and thus I merge without approval of @l-emele