Closed mgberg closed 9 months ago
Wow! What a great catch! I think there are two options:
Let's see what others think.
@steveraysteveray Another option would be to deprecate or delete Refectance
and replace it with a duplicate of it with a new URI such as ElectromagneticReflectance
if it is desired to keep the two kinds of Reflectance separate.
@steveraysteveray Any additional insights on this?
Yes, see #764. We just merged both definitions into Reflectance since Refectance was a misspelling. Pending review.
Ah! I missed that, thanks!
https://github.com/qudt/qudt-public-repo/blob/41c8507eb9ab97b8b8db7aebc9495619229b1747/vocab/quantitykinds/VOCAB_QUDT-QUANTITY-KINDS-ALL-v2.1.ttl#L17545-L17571
The above link highlights two quantity kinds currently defined:
Reflectance
, which according to the description is explicitly for sound power.Refectance
, which according to the description is "fraction of incident electromagnetic power that is reflected at an interface".The second URI and label (I think) is a typo, and the definition is consistent with reflectance as defined here which is the same page its
qudt:informativeReference
points to.Assuming that is a typo, presumably the typo should be fixed- but how should that be resolved given the existing
Reflectance
?