Re: vocabs, metadata set, datasets

> Yes, we need to use a terminology related as recognizably as
> possible to things already familiar to the intended reader,
> but we also need to point out to readers where perspectives
> differ.  On this point, I suggest we find a way to say
> that "records" may provide descriptive statements "about"
> more than one something.

So you could take the route that I took. First give a "familiar" / 
"rough" / "generic" description and then point out the 
problems/confusions with this generic view.

Mark

Received on Thursday, 20 January 2011 08:56:11 UTC