[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Re: An approach to describing the relationships betweenuni
Hi Jown, John Cowan wrote: > Emmanuil Batsis (Manos) scripsit: >>I don't think a mapping to a "canonical UOM" is needed, unless you >>intend to use it as a standard route to "infer" missing formulas. Anyway: > > Easy for you to say: you live in a rational SI world, and don't have > to deal with the Fred Flintstone Memorial Measurement System (name > tm Markus Kuhn, IIRC) and its close cousin the Former Imperial Glory > Measurement System. I just wanted to note that formulas and inference between them (to produce implicit ones) can work without a central canonical formula, as long as the set of explicit formulas provides enough info to build the right path. The result can be of any unit type you wish as long as it is encountered in this path. BTW, what does SI mean? -- Manos Batsis Netsmart S.A. Snail mail: Panepistimiou 58, 10678, Athens, Hellas URL: http://www.netsmart.gr Email: mbatsis at netsmart dot gr Tel: (+30) 210 33 02 608 Fax: (+30) 210 33 02 658 FOAF: http://forte.netsmart.gr/foaf/manos_foaf.rdf
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|