Alan Garny wrote: >> Again, this is a feature that it would be useful to be able to turn on >> and off. However I think in most cases the software will not be smart >> enough to figure out what the units should be. >> > > Wrong, it can easily be done. I was about to work on that in COR when Peter > got me to move over to "PCEnv". Check also JSim, it does units conversion > and, as far as I know and can tell, it does a pretty good job at it. >
This only applies if the model was initially coded with the intention that such a feature be used. If the model empirically works despite units issues, which is probably quite common, attempting to 'fix' the model will actually break it (for example, it might have conversion factors in there, but marked as dimensionless). It would require a lot more intelligence from a tool to work out if the conversion factors are there, perhaps folded into other conversion factors, and add the appropriate metadata. This is why doing automated conversions at this level would be a bad idea for a CellML tool. In light of the fact that: a) from a specification point of view, it is much better to make people write good equations and validate them than to have modellers rely on some feature which converts them, given that a single component is designed by a single person, and b) the current specification isn't supposed to request that such conversion be performed automatically (although it could be construed in such a way), and changing something this major will cause problems with models which already work empirically, I would recommend that we keep the status quo and not perform conversions within equations. Best regards, Andrew _______________________________________________ cellml-discussion mailing list cellml-discussion@cellml.org http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
