DQV terminology - Quality Measure, Measurement, Observation?

Hi everyone,

Related to ongoing discussions on DQV terminology, I have now a doubt on how we use the word 'measure'.

In the spec, dqv:QualityMeasure is a sub-class of (Datacube) qb:Observation [1] and an instance of dqv:QualityMeasure can be interpreted as the result of an action (of observing).

But I'm not sure this is really in line with the Datacube notions. In the definitions at [2] (especially in section 6) 'measures' are rather conceptual. Actually they may sit rather at the level of what we call 'metric' than at the level of thecurrent dqv:QualityMeasure.

I am also wondering whether some of us (especially me) may be biased because in our native languages, the noun 'measure' (not the verb!) may have a wider acception than in English. For example in French the noun 'mesure' can mean both the metric (in a mathematical sense) and the result of the action of measuring. Maybe English speakers would rather call the latter a 'measurement', (even though the boundaries for this noun are also not very clear in English either).

What do the native English speakers in the group think?

If there's general agreement that 'measure' is too confusing, then I'd suggest we replace QualityMeasure by QualityMeasurement or QualityObservation.

The problem is that the 'noun' observation will also be confusing for people outside the DataCube context. If I was not a bit familiar with Datacube, I'd think that dqv:QualityObservation could be a superclass of other classes in DQV like dqv:UserQualityFeedback [1]...

Best,

Antoine

[1] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html#dqv:QualityMeasure
[2] https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-data-cube/

Received on Friday, 19 February 2016 08:36:05 UTC