W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-architypes@w3.org > July 2017

Re: Alt Proposal discussions: ArchiveProperties vs ArchiveUnit

From: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 10:43:09 +0100
Message-ID: <CAD47Kz46ii2tRYLBKBvtHzuJPS8_DeUgK6n9WABJ+Jga=vwqnw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Owen Stephens <owen@ostephens.com>
Cc: public-architypes <public-architypes@w3.org>, Jane Stevenson <Jane.Stevenson@jisc.ac.uk>
Hi Owen,

Thanks for starting to split out the threads of discussion.

>From my point of view the type name of *ArchiveProperties* is more
descriptive of the vocabulary constructs it represents (for the benefit of
archivists applying it) than the type of *Thing* It is being applied to
(which will help the non archivists discover what is being described).
*ArchiveUnit* is closer to the intention I believe, also in this
alternative model *ArchiveItem* could also be a possibility.

~Richard.




On 17 July 2017 at 10:34, Owen Stephens <owen@ostephens.com> wrote:

> So my only argument for ‘ArchiveProperties’ over ‘ArchiveUnit’ in this
> case is that it might (but maybe not) be clearer about the fact that the
> type is an intangible. However, I’m happy with either, and I’ve added the
> suggestion that ‘ArchiveUnit’ could be used instead of ArchiveProperties to
> the proposal.
>
> Anyone else have views as to whether one is better than the other?
>
>
Received on Monday, 17 July 2017 09:43:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 August 2018 13:29:00 UTC