Re: vocabs, metadata set, datasets from Mark van Assem on 2011-01-20 (public-xg-lld@w3.org from January 2011)

From: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:55:16 +0100
To: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
CC: "gordon@gordondunsire.com" <gordon@gordondunsire.com>, <public-xg-lld@w3.org>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Message-ID: <4D37F874.3070003@cs.vu.nl>

> 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