Questions on modeling of dco:temperature

zednis commented 9 years ago

dco:temperature is a functional datatype property.

dco:temperature
      a       owl:FunctionalProperty , owl:DatatypeProperty ;
      rdfs:domain dco:PhysicalLocation ;
      rdfs:label "temperature"@en-US ;
      rdfs:range xsd:string ;
      vitro:descriptionAnnot
              "Temperature at which activity is conducted"^^xsd:string ;
      vitro:hiddenFromDisplayBelowRoleLevelAnnot
              <http://vitro.mannlib.cornell.edu/ns/vitro/role#public> ;
      vitro:hiddenFromPublishBelowRoleLevelAnnot
              <http://vitro.mannlib.cornell.edu/ns/vitro/role#public> ;
      vitro:inPropertyGroupAnnot
              <http://vitro.mannlib.cornell.edu/ns/default#n1591> ;
      vitro:prohibitedFromUpdateBelowRoleLevelAnnot
              <http://vitro.mannlib.cornell.edu/ns/vitro/role#public> ;
      vitro:publicDescriptionAnnot
              "Temperature at which activity is conducted"^^xsd:string .

I have few questions:

Should this property really be functional? May a physical location only have 1 temperature?
Should we include "at which activity is conducted" in the public description when activity is not part of the property definition nor the definition of the domain?
Do we want the value of this to have a defined unit of measure and specify the measured value as a number (double) rather than being embedded in a string?

zednis commented 9 years ago

@xgmachina @mrpatrickwest

olyerickson commented 9 years ago

The DCO properties of temperature, pressure and (I believe) depth have a weird history --- if I recall, the biggies wanted descriptive metadata associated with field sites that could conceivably also be mapped, etc. So, not hard-core measurements in the usual sense.

That request got coupled with the dearth of available interface elements --- if VIVO doesn't have binary, why should we expect something that allows us to enter temperature, pressure or depth in a rigorous fashion?

That's the history. I'm not suggesting that it needs to be the future history!

John

On Monday, August 10, 2015, Stephan Zednik notifications@github.com wrote:

@xgmachina https://github.com/xgmachina @mrpatrickwest https://github.com/mrpatrickwest

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/tetherless-world/dco-ontology/issues/8#issuecomment-129615621 .or

John S. Erickson, Ph.D. Director of Operations, The Rensselaer IDEA Deputy Director, Web Science Research Center (RPI) http://tw.rpi.edu erickj4@rpi.edu Twitter & Skype: olyerickson

zednis commented 9 years ago

OK, I think I am ok with these properties if we add a comment to the properties explaining that they are descriptive and any unit values will have to included in the text.

There are currently 14 uses of temperature, 5 uses of pressure, and 11 uses of depth in our KB. Do we still have a requirement to map this information?

olyerickson commented 9 years ago

These attributes were meant to coarsely represent the conditions of a field site.

Currently the only place I imagine we might present this "data" is in the pop-up of the Field Studies Browser, where details are presented. Not sure if we do...It is not listed in the Field Sites listing in the Field Studies Summary report e.g/

https://deepcarbon.net//dco_field_study_summary?uri=http://info.deepcarbon.net/individual/n9402

(There would be columns for that)

John

On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Stephan Zednik notifications@github.com wrote:

OK, I think I am ok with these properties if we add a comment to the properties explaining that they are descriptive and any unit values will have to included in the text.

There are currently 14 uses of temperature, 5 uses of pressure, and 11 uses of depth in our KB. Do we still have a requirement to map this information?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/tetherless-world/dco-ontology/issues/8#issuecomment-136852301 .

John S. Erickson, Ph.D. Director of Operations, The Rensselaer IDEA Deputy Director, Web Science Research Center (RPI) http://tw.rpi.edu olyerickson@gmail.com Twitter & Skype: olyerickson

mrpatrickwest commented 9 years ago

makes no sense to have this as part of a physical location or a field study. As Stephan said, these are time-dependent measurements

who might we talk to about this? What "higher power" do you refer to in the ticket?

tetherless-world / dco-ontology

Questions on modeling of dco:temperature #8