Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

Dear all, Magnitude is not the same as Units of Measurement. Units of Measurement are not the same as Magnitude. Gerard Gerard Freriks +31 620347088 gfrer at luna.nl > On 17 nov. 2014, at 13:47, Ian McNicoll oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > RM function

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

Hi Gerard, Agreed - the dummy function call says "give me the magnitude in ?xx? Units of measure, performing any conversions necessary?. Ian Dr Ian McNicoll office +44 (0)1536 414 994 fax +44 (0)1536 516317 mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 skype ianmcnicoll ian.mcnicoll at oceaninformatics.com Clin

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

On 17/11/2014 12:47, Ian McNicoll wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > RM function to retrieve a magnitude expressed as a particular unit. > > from my previous email ... > > I think we could add something at reference model level to say give me > this quantity in 'x' units, performing the conversion at server l

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

Hi Thomas, RM function to retrieve a magnitude expressed as a particular unit. from my previous email ... I think we could add something at reference model level to say give me this quantity in 'x' units, performing the conversion at server level where possible or return null. This could also be

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

On 17/11/2014 07:42, Ian McNicoll wrote: > Hi Karsten, > > I agree, this will not always be possible but where the conversion can > be safely done, I would still argue that this should be done at RM > level and not per-archetype. > Hi Ian, I'm not sure what you mean by "doing this at the RM level

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

Hi Karsten, I agree, this will not always be possible but where the conversion can be safely done, I would still argue that this should be done at RM level and not per-archetype. Ian Dr Ian McNicoll mobile +44 (0)775 209 7859 office +44 (0)1536 414994 skype: ianmcnicoll email: ian at freshehr.co

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 12:02:00PM +0100, Karsten Hilbert wrote: > There are "units" in use which only apply in context -- their > "conversion" would require knowing, say, the substance measured. think mg/dl <-> mmol/l Karsten Hilbert -- GPG key ID E4071346 @ eu.pool.sks-keyservers.net E167 67F

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 01:55:56PM +, Ian McNicoll wrote: > I am sure that could be done but it would mean replicating these kind > of statements in every archetype that had multiple units. This really > feels like something that should be handled computationally at RM > level- it is universal

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

ls, and predominantly working with archetypes. Not sure how we could do > that? L > > > > Regards > > > > Heater > > > > From: openEHR-technical [mailto:openehr-technical-bounces at > lists.openehr.org] > On Behalf Of Thomas Beale > Sent: Friday, 14 Novemb

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

NTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units On 14/11/2014 08:42, Bj?rn N?ss wrote: I have been thinking about profiling. I am not sure if this fix the problem regarding complexity. This may be an governance thing. If we define a metric and british imperial profile we may define that

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

his add complexity and we must be sure that we really need >>> it. >>> >>> >>> Vennlig hilsen >>> Bj?rn N?ss >>> Produktansvarlig >>> DIPS ASA >>> >>> Mobil +47 93 43 29 10 >>> >>> >>> Original mes

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

> it. > > > Vennlig hilsen > Bj?rn N?ss > Produktansvarlig > DIPS ASA > > Mobil +47 93 43 29 10 > > > Original message -------- > From: Thomas Beale > Date:14/11/2014 10:14 (GMT+01:00) > To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org > Subject: Re: Po

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

gt;> Produktansvarlig >> DIPS ASA >> >> Mobil +47 93 43 29 10 >> >> >> Original message >> From: Thomas Beale >> Date:14/11/2014 10:14 (GMT+01:00) >> To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org >> Subject: Re: Postulate: DV_QUANTITY sho

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

On 14/11/2014 13:32, Diego Bosc? wrote: > Again, I strongly believe we can achieve this with > Assertions/pseudo-OCL that currently can be defined in archetypes. > For example: "if 'units' from at are 'kg' then > 'value'='value'*1000 and 'units'=g" > > I think Thomas told me there were some imp

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

l +47 93 43 29 10 > > > Original message > From: Thomas Beale > Date:14/11/2014 10:14 (GMT+01:00) > To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org > Subject: Re: Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible > units > > > Should we ha

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

+01:00) To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units Should we have a way of marking the 'normative' units for computation / conversion? So that then you only create AQL queries in the units you want, and let

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

weights to be grams. But the question is if we then MUST add grams > to the Archetype? > > @ian Creating 2 different archetypes for each unit only moves the querying > complexity elsewhere (arguably worse). > I agree when you put it like this :-). This would be a nightmare if we h

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

rent archetypes for each unit only moves the querying > complexity elsewhere (arguably worse). > I agree when you put it like this :-). This would be a nightmare if we have > one archtype for each unit. > > And to bring back the postulate: "DV_QUANTITY should be modelled wi

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

On 14/11/2014 00:57, Ian McNicoll wrote: > Hi Pablo, > > I would agree, this information is also carried in the Archetype > Editor property files, although I suspect not as well maintained as > the UCUM file. > > > @Thomas - the profile suggestion is interesting but it feels to me > that it adds le

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

On 14/11/2014 08:42, Bj?rn N?ss wrote: > > I have been thinking about profiling. I am not sure if this fix the > problem regarding complexity. > > This may be an governance thing. If we define a metric and british > imperial profile we may define that in Norway every application MUST > use the m

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

: 13. november 2014 22:04 To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org; For openEHR clinical discussions Subject: Re: Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units On 13/11/2014 20:34, Bakke, Silje Ljosland wrote: The original context for this discussion was this archetype

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

:07 (GMT+01:00) To: openeh technical ,openEHR Clinical Subject: RE: Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units Hi Bj?rn, IMO when you have complex unit processing, a lookup service for UCUM might be needed. UCUM contains multipliers and correspondences between different

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

elsewhere (arguably worse). I agree when you put it like this :-). This would be a nightmare if we have one archtype for each unit. And to bring back the postulate: "DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units". This only means that we should be restrictive when adding m

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

, check this: > > > > http://unitsofmeasure.org/ucum-essence.xml > > > > Using this, a constraint on archetypes might not be needed. What do > > you think? > > > > -- > > Kind regards, > > Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez > > http://cabolabs.com

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

-clinical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Re: Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units As mentioned on twitter, I agree with that postulate for templates, but not general archetypes :) [Bj?rn N?ss] I partly agree. I agree that the Templates would adapt archetypes to a

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

enehr-technical at lists.openehr.org; openehr-clinical at > lists.openehr.org > Subject: Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible > units > Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 20:07:00 + > > > I want to try out a postulate regarding modelling of datavalues, and more > sp

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

Could assertions/rules be used for this kind of profiles? 2014-11-13 22:03 GMT+01:00 Thomas Beale : > On 13/11/2014 20:34, Bakke, Silje Ljosland wrote: > > The original context for this discussion was this archetype: > http://arketyper.no/ckm/#showArchetype_1078.36.25 (default archetype > language

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

Cc: openehr-clinical at lists.openehr.org > Subject: Re: Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest > possible units > > As mentioned on twitter, I agree with that postulate for templates, but not > general archetypes :) > > 2014-11-13 21:07 GMT+01:00 Bj?rn N?ss :

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

As mentioned on twitter, I agree with that postulate for templates, but not general archetypes :) 2014-11-13 21:07 GMT+01:00 Bj?rn N?ss : > I want to try out a postulate regarding modelling of datavalues, and more > specific DV_QUANTITY. > > > > The postulate is: > > > > Postulate 1: A data type o

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

do you think? -- Kind regards, Eng. Pablo Pazos Guti?rrez http://cabolabs.com From: b...@dips.no To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org; openehr-clinical at lists.openehr.org Subject: Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 20:07:00 +

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

On 13/11/2014 20:34, Bakke, Silje Ljosland wrote: > The original context for this discussion was this archetype: > http://arketyper.no/ckm/#showArchetype_1078.36.25 (default archetype language > for this CKM is Norwegian, but it can be changed manually) > > Being an all-metric country since the 1

Postulate: DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units

I want to try out a postulate regarding modelling of datavalues, and more specific DV_QUANTITY. The postulate is: Postulate 1: A data type of DV_QUANTITY should be modelled with fewest possible units! Reason behind this is to make queries and reasoning over the values easy. This makes it both