Ontology:P203: Difference between revisions
m pass / fail |
m clean up |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
== Prototype notes == | == Prototype notes == | ||
* A question for judging videos literally aimed at physics professors. It's possible for a scientific hypothesis to be aimed at a very high level and still be unintelligible to highly educated people who are new to the field. | |||
** Also applies to "ontological spaghetti" where someone like Žižek presents a model that is completely incomprehensible to any human being at first sight. | ** Also applies to "ontological spaghetti" where someone like Žižek presents a model that is completely incomprehensible to any human being at first sight. | ||
* Would this description or argument look unnecessarily opaque to a college-educated person? ("Bachelor test") | * Would this description or argument look unnecessarily opaque to a college-educated person? ("Bachelor test") | ||
== Usage notes == | |||
[[Category:Properties accepting a communication rating level]] [[Category:Communication rating levels ontology]] | [[Category:Properties accepting a communication rating level]] [[Category:Communication rating levels ontology]] | ||
Revision as of 12:41, 21 May 2025
- pronounced [P] "Dirac test"
- pronounced [P] "Dirac test"
Characteristics in draft
Properties
- item type
- label (en)
- pronounced [P] "Dirac test"
- alias (en)
- Is this description or argument unnecessarily opaque for its intended educational level?
- Is this description or argument unnecessarily opaque even to educated people?
- "Dirac test" (communication question 03)
- QID references
- P200 rating / communication rating level
- color swatch references
- quantum mechanics
- Property data type
- item
- instance of
- communication rating level
Prototype notes
- A question for judging videos literally aimed at physics professors. It's possible for a scientific hypothesis to be aimed at a very high level and still be unintelligible to highly educated people who are new to the field.
- Also applies to "ontological spaghetti" where someone like Žižek presents a model that is completely incomprehensible to any human being at first sight.
- Would this description or argument look unnecessarily opaque to a college-educated person? ("Bachelor test")