Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Should we define a quantity Arbitrary or is Dimensionless enough? #174

Open
keilw opened this issue Sep 4, 2020 · 1 comment
Open

Should we define a quantity Arbitrary or is Dimensionless enough? #174

keilw opened this issue Sep 4, 2020 · 1 comment

Comments

@keilw
Copy link
Member

keilw commented Sep 4, 2020

#173 and #59 point to missing UCUM units like ARBITRARY_UNIT. The UCUM catalog defines these as quantity type "arbitrary", should we add a quantity type Artitrary or is Dimensionless enough?
There are other types like "arbitrary biologic activity" so the question is, if those could all use "arbitrary" or should have their own types often used for just one or two units? Or do we stick to Dimensionless for all of them?

@alexanderkiel
Copy link

I have laboratory data that uses the unit [arb'U]/mL for values of with LOINC 16135-6 "Beta 2 glycoprotein 1 IgG Ab [Units/volume] in Serum". Would it be possible to map that to ARBITRARY_UNIT? As I understand a simple entry in UCUMFormat_CS.properties would be sufficient. Can I somehow add such units on myself without editing this project files directly?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants