[auscope-geosciml] Quantity vs QuantityRange [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Boisvert, Eric Eric.Boisvert at RNCan-NRCan.gc.ca
Fri Jun 17 10:58:57 EDT 2011


>2) use CGI_TermRange in those cases where CGI_Term (1..*) is really meant to indicate a range (eg, for particle sorting and metamorphic facies?) rather than a set of random single values
 
A range should only have 2 terms right (assuming the terms are ordinal) ?
 
I already expressed my opinions about this.  Since GeoSciML imports O&M and O&M imports swe, we end up with 2 value representations that overlaps.
As far as terms are concerned, there are Category and CategoryRange that could replace CGI_Term and CGI_TermRange, and QuantityRange can replace CGI_NumericRange.
 
What's left are the specialised numerical representation (NumericalAgeRange and PlanarOrientation).
They could be simulated with swe:DataRecord.  Maybe it's a bit of a stretch ?
 
Eric


________________________________

De : auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] De la part de Oliver.Raymond at ga.gov.au
Envoyé : 16 juin 2011 22:01
À : auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Objet : Re: [auscope-geosciml] Quantity vs QuantityRange [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]



Hi Eric,

 

peakPressureValue and peakTemperatureValue must, by the nature of being a "peak" value, be only one number and not a range.  That one number may have an error associated with it.   There is a subtle difference between a range (2 numbers, upper and lower values, both of which may have errors - like NumericAge), and a single value number with an error.  The chemical assay is an example of a single number (swe:quantity) with an error (swe:quality) -  the pattern works for me.

 

On a related point, I was recently mulling over the various places in the model that we use either a term range (eg, AlterationDescription/alterationDegree) or multiple single values (eg, MetamorphicDescription/metamorphicFacies, and ParticleGeometryDescription/sorting).  I think there is scope for more consistent use of ranges or multiple values.  Typically in the model, we are using CGI_Term (1..*) for cases where more than one term is allowed, including where those multiple terms imply a range.  AlterationDescription/alterationDegree is the only place in the model where we still use CGI_TermRange.  

 

This suggests to me that we should either:    1) stop using CGI_TermRange altogether and remove it from the model, or 

2) use CGI_TermRange in those cases where CGI_Term (1..*) is really meant to indicate a range (eg, for particle sorting and metamorphic facies?) rather than a set of random single values

 

Cheers,

Ollie 

 

_______________________________________________________________________

 

Ollie Raymond

 

Project Leader

National Geological Maps and Data Standards Project <http://www.ga.gov.au/minerals/projects/current-projects/geological-maps-standards.html> 

Geoscience Australia

 

Interoperability Working Group <https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/wiki/bin/view/CGIModel/InteroperabilityWG> 

IUGS Commission for the Management and Application of Geoscience Information

 

Address: GPO Box 378, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia | ABN: 80 091 799 039

Ph: +61 2 62499575  |  Fax: +61 2 62479992  |  Email: oliver.raymond at ga.gov.au <mailto:oliver.raymond at ga.gov.au>   |  Google Map <http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=canberra+australia&ie=UTF8&ll=-35.344028,149.158362&spn=0.007684,0.016404&t=h&z=17&iwloc=addr&om=1>  

_______________________________________________________________________

 

--- This message was created with 100% recycled electrons ---

 

________________________________

From: auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au [mailto:auscope-geosciml-bounces at lists.arcs.org.au] On Behalf Of Boisvert, Eric
Sent: Friday, 17 June 2011 1:09 AM
To: auscope-geosciml at lists.arcs.org.au
Subject: [auscope-geosciml] Quantity vs QuantityRange

 

 

I see (for example) that MetamorphicDescription has peakPressureValue and preakTemperatureValue as swe:Quantity and not as swe:QuantityRange

But I also noticed that Olllie used that pattern 

                       <swe:Quantity gml:id="GAGeochemAnalysis_1526753_SiO2_Result" definition="SiO2 concentration"> 
                            <swe:uom code="%25" xlink:href="http://www.opengis.net/def/uom/UCUM/0/%25" xlink:title="percent"/>

                            <swe:quality>     <!-- Analytical Error --> 
                                <swe:Quantity gml:id="GAGeochemAnalysis_1526753_SiO2_Error" definition="SiO2 analytical error">

                                    <swe:uom code="%25" xlink:href="http://www.opengis.net/def/uom/UCUM/0/%25" xlink:title="percent"/>

                                    <swe:value>0.1</swe:value> 
                                </swe:Quantity> 
                            </swe:quality> 
                            <swe:value>76.4</swe:value> 
                        </swe:Quantity> 

 

The error band is stored in the swe:quality.  I suppose a range can be expressed the same way (swe:quality can be a QuantityRange and swe:value can be absent) - is this the pattern ?

Eric 

================================================================ 
Eric Boisvert 
Expert  TI-GI / IT-IM Expert 
Eric.Boisvert at rncan.gc.ca, 418-654-3705, facsimile/télécopieur 
418-654-2615 
490, rue de la Couronne, Québec (Québec), G1K 9A9 
490, rue de la Couronne, Quebec, Quebec, G1K 9A9 

Laboratoire de cartographie numérique et de photogrammétrie (LCNP) 
Digital Cartography and Photogrammetry Laboratory (DCPL) 
Commission géologique du Canada (Québec) / Geological Survey of Canada (Quebec) 
Ressources naturelles Canada / Natural Resources Canada 
Gouvernement du Canada / Government of Canada 
http://cgc.rncan.gc.ca/org/quebec <http://cgc.rncan.gc.ca/org/quebec>  
http://cgc.rncan.gc.ca/dir/index_f.php?id=4186 <http://cgc.rncan.gc.ca/dir/index_f.php?id=4186>  / http://cgc.rncan.gc.ca/dir/index_e.php?id=4186 <http://cgc.rncan.gc.ca/dir/index_e.php?id=4186>  





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengeospatial.org/pipermail/geosciml/attachments/20110617/44942001/attachment.htm>


More information about the GeoSciML mailing list