W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > January 2006

Re: [VM] name for the cookbook

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:50:24 -0500
Message-ID: <43CD0430.20204@acm.org>
To: public-swbp-wg@w3.org

Speaking as mostly a lurker, and at the risk of being considered 
terminally dull, I like Ralph's original suggestion (or even "Serving 
RDFS and OWL Vocabularies").  Shorter is better, especially when the 
only reason for lengthening is to indirectly reference the "cookbook" 
metaphor.  [If you really want that metaphor, why not use it directly, 
as in "A Cookbook for Serving...."?  A couple of other nits:  You don't 
usually use either cookbooks or recipes to describe serving, rather, you 
serve what was produced using cookbooks or recipes.  Also, if they're 
going to be cookbooks or recipes, aren't they different for French, 
Italian, and Chinese "cuisine"?]

--Frank

Libby Miller wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Dan Brickley wrote:
> 
> 
>>* Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk> [2006-01-16 19:13-0000]
>>
>>>In his revision Ralph suggested a different name for what we have affectionately referred to so far as 'the cookbook' ... he suggests:
>>>
>>>'Best Practices for Serving RDFS and OWL Vocabularies'
>>>
>>>What about:
>>>
>>>'Best Practice Recipes for Serving RDFS and OWL Vocabularies'
>>>
>>>... ? Keeps the flavour in the title :)
>>
> 
> I like the 'recipes' idea.
> 
> 
>>I wonder how well such metaphors work for those with English as a
>>2nd language? That's a genuine "wonder" btw I'm not being rhetorical!
> 
> 
> well equally 'cookbook' ...
> 
> Libby
> 
> 
>>Dan
>>
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2006 14:48:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:16 UTC