head	1.3;
access;
symbols;
locks; strict;
comment	@# @;
expand	@o@;


1.3
date	2007.03.06.17.30.00;	author TWikiGuest;	state Exp;
branches;
next	1.2;

1.2
date	2006.05.15.08.21.51;	author GregorHagedorn;	state Exp;
branches;
next	1.1;

1.1
date	2006.05.15.03.46.22;	author BobMorris;	state Exp;
branches;
next	;


desc
@none
@


1.3
log
@Added topic name via script
@
text
@---+!! %TOPIC%

%META:TOPICINFO{author="GregorHagedorn" date="1147681311" format="1.1" version="1.2"}%
%META:TOPICPARENT{name="DiscussionFor1dot1RC1"}%
(wiped, please keep the discussion compact in  DiscussionFor1dot1RC1)
@


1.2
log
@none
@
text
@d1 2
@


1.1
log
@none
@
text
@d1 3
a3 58
%META:TOPICINFO{author="BobMorris" date="1147664782" format="1.1" version="1.1"}%
%META:TOPICPARENT{name="DiscussionFor1dotRC1"}%

Discussion of issues in SDD1.1 which are not errors, but may be debilitating.

Damian.Barnier and Bob.Morris agree that such issues may be treated with a Subversion branch for consideration of remerging when there are no errors in the Release Candidate stream in the main trunk in Subversion.

%TOC%
---++++++ Multiple Quantitative Values
A minor issue has cropped up in implementing SDD for Lucid.

In Lucid, we allow one or more sets of quantitative values for any taxon. For example, leaf length for a genus may be (2-)5-10(-25) mm OR 75-100 mm. We can handle this (rather than requiring the user to enter 2-100. That is - any taxon may have zero-many instances of (a-)b-c(-d) (or variants thereof)

Under the current schema, to encode (for one taxon for one quantitative character)
(1-)2-3(-5)
(10-)15-20(-25)

requires:

<Quantitative>
  <...>
  <Measure type="Min" value="1"/>
  <Measure type="UnknownMethLower" value="2"/>
  <Measure type="UnknownMethUpper" value="3"/>
  <Measure type="Max" value="5"/>
  <Measure type="Min" value="10"/> 
  <Measure type="UnknownMethLower" value="15"/>
  <Measure type="UnknownMethUpper" value="20"/>
  <Measure type="Max" value="25"/>
  <...>
</Quantitative>

But a consumer would not be able to make sense of this, as the order is not meaningful.

we would like the Measure/PMeasure values be placed into a sequence allowing the measures to be grouped, for eg.

<Quantitative>
  <...>
  <ValueSet>
    <Measure type="Min" value="1"/>
    <Measure type="UnknownMethLower" value="2"/>
    <Measure type="UnknownMethUpper" value="3"/>
    <Measure type="Max" value="5"/>
  </ValueSet>
  <ValueSet>
    <Measure type="Min" value="10"/> 
    <Measure type="UnknownMethLower" value="15"/>
    <Measure type="UnknownMethUpper" value="20"/>
    <Measure type="Max" value="25"/>
  </ValueSet>
  <...>
</Quantitative>

It would also be desirable to have the Modifiers within the ValueSet as rows may have different modifiers applied to them, ie, a common row, and a rare or misinterpreted row (that is, 2-5 may be the normal (common) value, and 100-200 may be rare, or a misinterpretation).

-- Main.KevinThiele - 15 May 2006 moved here by -- Main.BobMorris - 15 May 2006


@