Re: strawman draft of "RDF Data Layers and Datasets"

So, trying to keep to the intuition of a bundle of things bound together, how about "page" ? 

This has the obvious connection to 'web page', which invokes the whole http-get world: people are used to the metaphor that takes us from a sheet of paper in a book to a dynamic website that can be cached, etc.., so we can rely on this intuition shift again here. If we want to be more distinctive, we can call them RDF pages and treat 'page' as a contraction. 

Pat

On May 2, 2012, at 10:44 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:

> On 2 May 2012 16:47, Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl> wrote:
>> On 02-05-2012 15:42, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>> I took the liberty of moving forward with drafting a possible spec, so
>>> we have something to look at.   Several sections are empty, but I'm
>>> pretty happy with what's there.  The example is that same as on the
>>> "Layers" page on the wiki.
>> 
>> Terminology issue (I would by no means want to disturb any arising
>> consensus).
>> 
>> I don't think the term "layer" will do the required trick. I cannot but
>> associate it with vertical relations. The term we choose should have both
>> vertical and horizontal connotations. I'd prefer "box": boxes can be put
>> next to each other or on top of each other.
>> 
>> Feel free to ignore for the moment.
> 
> RDF data can also be stitched together into a single flat thing, like a quilt.
> 
> The main reason I like 'layer' (and surface) is that data integration
> is RDF's defining and most under-sold feature, and this metaphor does
> highlight that feature...
> 
> Dan
> 
> 

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2012 19:39:11 UTC