W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > June 2005

RE: [OEP] A possible alternative term for fluent

From: Uschold, Michael F <michael.f.uschold@boeing.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 15:36:11 -0700
Message-ID: <4301AFA5A72736428DA388B73676A3813F6BB5@XCH-NW-6V1.nw.nos.boeing.com>
To: <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>, <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

What is the motivation for using a different term than fluent?

Maybe: it is too formal, and no one heard of it?

If so, then I'm not sure that effectivity will be much of an
improvement. Although people talk about it a lot around Boeing, I have
not grasped its essential meaning in a way that I could define it. Your
definition helps a lot, actually...

Separate point: what would be the grammatical form of 'effectivity' to
use?
Presumably not: one effectivity / two effectivities, to replace
fluent/fluents
That is pretty awkward-sounding.

Mike


============================================
Mike Uschold
Tel: 425 865-3605              Fax: 425 865-2965
============================================



>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: ewallace@cme.nist.gov [mailto:ewallace@cme.nist.gov] 
>  Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 2:23 PM
>  To: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
>  Subject: [OEP] A possible alternative term for fluent
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  OEPers:
>  
>  A recent email reminded me of the term "effectivity".  This 
>  is the term 
>  used in manufacturing product engineering for the concept of 
>  a model being "effective" during a certain time frame.  In 
>  Product Data Management (PDM) systems that support this, a 
>  different product/process design can be presented to 
>  manufacturing depending on shift or date.  
>  
>  This seems similar to the idea of fluent as I understand it. 
>    Effectivity
>  might therefore be a reasonable substitute for the term 
>  fluent if OEP 
>  produces a note on this.
>  
>  -Evan
>  
>  
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2005 22:36:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:43 UTC