W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis-log@w3.org > June 2018

Re: [sensors] Usage of "concrete"

From: neilmcn via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:12:59 +0000
To: public-device-apis-log@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-401089642-1530202378-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
I was the original someone... so here is my original remark to dontcallmedom...

> Well that is a dreadful usage IMHO. 
> Apart from the issue of concrete == b├ęton, you compound the issue linguistically when you say (e.g.) 
> 	An abstract Sensor base class extended by concrete sensors.
> It is not the sensors that are 'concrete' but the sensor APIs! If you must use "concrete" then it should be "extended with a concrete API" although that is pretty poor too. 
> Far better would be to use "profile." Thus "An abstract Sensor base class extended with a profile for a particular sensor type." Then you could have "accelerometer profile of the generic sensor API." This usage has currency in eg ISO/DIS 19115-1 metadata standard. 
> You may think this kind of thing is trivial. You all understand what you mean by "concrete". In my 20 plus years of reporting on standards I observe that once outside the committee room these things become very important for comprehension, uptake and use.  Apart from the nuisance of someone genuinely confused by the (real) possibility of accelerometers designed for use in construction.

GitHub Notification of comment by neilmcn
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues/362#issuecomment-401089642 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2018 16:13:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:34:25 UTC