Use QUDT vs CCO for measurement units

[alanruttenberg]

As discussed on today's BFO-CCO office hours, see branch qudt for a transformed version of QUDT that is more idiomatic for CCO.

[johnbeve]

[heart] John Beverley reacted to your message:

---

From: Alan Ruttenberg @.> Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 6:15:19 PM To: CommonCoreOntology/CommonCoreOntologies @.> Cc: Subscribed @.***> Subject: [CommonCoreOntology/CommonCoreOntologies] Use QUDT vs CCO for measurement units (Issue #307)

As discussed on today's BFO-CCO office hours, see branch qudt for a transformed version of QUDT that is more idiomatic for CCO.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/CommonCoreOntology/CommonCoreOntologies/issues/307, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AD4ZM24PSHKTKUUOU5LQABDZOKG3PAVCNFSM6AAAAABLQ642L6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43ASLTON2WKOZSGQZTENZVGY4TMMQ. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>

[alanruttenberg]

Direct link to the branch https://github.com/CommonCoreOntology/CommonCoreOntologies/tree/qudt

[swartik]

@alanruttenberg Opening AllCoreOntology.ttl in Protege didn't load the measurement-units ontology properly. It took my aged eyes a little while to spot why. The URL for the measurement units ontology is:

http://www.ontologyrepository.com/CommonCoreOntologies/Mid/UnitOfMeasureOntology

"Unit" rather than "Units". Also, the default prefix is:

http://www.ontologyrepository.com/CommonCoreOntologies/Mid/UnitOfMeasureOntology#

It should end with a "/", right?

Plus a typo: README.md refers to qudt-readme.org rather than qudt-readme.md.

[alanruttenberg]

@swartik thanks! fixed.

[alanruttenberg]

The default prefix doesn't matter because it is unused. Protege thinks every ontology uses the ontology IRI as a prefix, but it doesn't. Either Protege or the OWLAPI adds the @base automatically. I've left it unchanged relative to master.

[alanruttenberg]

Recording issues as I find them.

• The definitions are of datatype qudt:LatexString. We don't want to introduce new datatypes. Some terms have a text only definition on another property. If we use this we'll have to decide whether to leave the definitions with latex embedded or whether to somehow strip those out.
• The unit systems should get labels

[dlutz2]

Alan; I think I saw another datatype of htmltext or something similar, Haven't scanned for more. Similar issue with embedded HTML markup.

[alanruttenberg]

Last commit removed the custom datatypes and cleaned the HTML, very few tags were used. \<strong> parts got asterisks around them, \<em> parts got underscores around them, and x<sup>2</sup> forms translated to x^2 Latex in definitions remain. I'm looking into how they might be rendered as text.