[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Hi Jown,
John Cowan wrote:
> Emmanuil Batsis (Manos) scripsit:
>>I don't think a mapping to a "canonical UOM" is needed, unless you
>>intend to use it as a standard route to "infer" missing formulas. Anyway:
>
> Easy for you to say: you live in a rational SI world, and don't have
> to deal with the Fred Flintstone Memorial Measurement System (name
> tm Markus Kuhn, IIRC) and its close cousin the Former Imperial Glory
> Measurement System.
I just wanted to note that formulas and inference between them (to
produce implicit ones) can work without a central canonical formula, as
long as the set of explicit formulas provides enough info to build the
right path. The result can be of any unit type you wish as long as it is
encountered in this path.
BTW, what does SI mean?
--
Manos Batsis
Netsmart S.A.
Snail mail:
Panepistimiou 58,
10678, Athens, Hellas
URL: http://www.netsmart.gr
Email: mbatsis at netsmart dot gr
Tel: (+30) 210 33 02 608
Fax: (+30) 210 33 02 658
FOAF: http://forte.netsmart.gr/foaf/manos_foaf.rdf
|
