Re: [unitsml] Groups - UnitsML TC Agenda for Sept. 12, 2007 (UnitsMLTC-agenda-2007-09-12.doc) uploaded

All,

   I also have just a few comments:

1.) I may be missing this, but there appears to be no element
    for quantity definitions. This seems like an important
    piece of information. I would recommend that we add such
    an element (and allow for multiple instances in different
    languages).

2.) The comment "<!-- REVISE -->" appears in the definition
    of the quantityType attribute. I don't know the exact
    meaning of this attribute. I think we should discuss:
    1.) what it means, 2.) why it is required, and 3.) why
    there is a comment requesting a revision.

3.) In regard to Craig's comment below about degrees Rankine,
    I would like to note that I have seen both usages so both
    are used in practice. NIST publication 811 uses the term
    "degrees Rankine" in the conversion tables, but I don't
    know if 811 is an authoritative reference for non-SI units.
    (It is, of course, authoritative for SI units.) In any case
    it is important to note that in terms of the UnitsML schema
    the enumerated unit identifiers only have meaning in terms
    of their documented corresponding units. We have chosen
    terms which roughly match U.S. English usage for convenience;
    we could have named the identifier "XJ4234" and UnitsML
    would still work properly as long as this identifier was
    documented as referring to the Rankine temperature scale.

Peter

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Craig Seymour" <>
To: <>; <>
Cc: <>; <>
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 7:30 AM
Subject: RE: [unitsml] Groups - UnitsML TC Agenda for Sept. 12, 2007 
(UnitsMLTC-agenda-2007-09-12.doc) uploaded

Bob,

Thanks for organising this.  I, for one, am grateful for the opportunity to 
contribute asynchronously.

I have no additions or changes to the posted content.  I have one 
observation, and one question though.

1. Since I became involved with UnitsML, I've never really 'got' the 
QuantitySet element.  I see that something called QuantitiesML would want to 
reference/incorporate UnitsML, but not the other way around.  Perhaps I'm 
just being too much of a purist - certainly I can't imagine that having it 
in there being a barrier to implementation.

2. I've been under the impression for years that degrees in the Rankine 
scale are properly referred to simply as 'Rankine' and 'R' rather than 
'degree Rankine' and '訌'.  I have no evidence for this, and wondered if 
anyone on the list had an authoritative response?

Craig

> -----Original Message-----
> From:  [mailto:]
> Sent: 12 September 2007 22:29
> To: 
> Cc: ; 
> Subject: [unitsml] Groups - UnitsML TC Agenda for Sept. 12, 2007
> (UnitsMLTC-agenda-2007-09-12.doc) uploaded
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> In addition to the agenda, I've also uploaded version 0.9.9 of the schema,
> the history of changes made to the schema, and version 0.3 of the
> Guidelines for the use of UnitsML.
>
> Please contact me if you have any questions.
>
> Thank you, in advance, for looking over this material.
>
> Sincerely,
> Bob Dragoset
>
>  -- Dr. Robert Dragoset
>
> The document named UnitsML TC Agenda for Sept. 12, 2007
> (UnitsMLTC-agenda-2007-09-12.doc) has been submitted by Dr. Robert
> Dragoset
> to the OASIS UnitsML TC document repository.
>
> Document Description:
> UnitsML TC Agenda for asynchronous meeting.
>
> View Document Details:
> http://www.oasis-
> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/unitsml/document.php?document_id=25276
>
> Download Document:
> http://www.oasis-
> open.org/apps/org/workgroup/unitsml/download.php/25276/UnitsMLTC-agenda-
> 2007-09-12.doc
>
>
> PLEASE NOTE:  If the above links do not work for you, your email
> application
> may be breaking the link into two pieces.  You may be able to copy and
> paste
> the entire link address into the address field of your web browser.
>
> -OASIS Open Administration