human readable terms

[zachll]

We should choose terms that are easy for people to learn as newcomers, and which do not require memorizing a code or acronym. For the performance summary display terms, here are some initial conventions that we might consider:

multi-performer single-performer time series or multi-time single-time (?)

This issue is resolved when we have naming conventions that use human readable terms for all of the classes under the performance summary display

[grosscol]

The names of attributes from which we are deriving the names from are performer and time. We're using the cardinality of the attributes.

The initial naming convention appears to be <cardinality word>-<attribute name>

So we need a table of terms for cardinality.

Cardinality	Term
0	""
1	"single"
2	"double"
2+	"multi"

[zachll]

We can use the principles in the BFO book in Chapter 4 to refine our terms, taxonomy, and definitions further.

I think we also need to reduce the number of words in our terms and I'm wondering about the following:

multi-performer -> comparative single-performer -> individual

Also perhaps we should use "time series" instead of "multi-time" because it is the common usage. Not sure how to say "single-time" but it seems like there's a better way.

[grosscol]

In this scheme, there is no special treatment of the 2p nor 2t cases. That simplifies the terms to the following table:

Cardinality	Performer	Time
0	""	""	""
1	"individual"	"instant"
2	"comparative"	"time series"
2+	"comparative"	"time series"

[zachll]

The term "instant" can connote immediacy for me in a way that seems confusing for describing non-time-series reports. How about using "time point" instead?

[grosscol]

That makes sense to me.

[CooperStansbury]

Closing. Please open a new issue for cardinality when appropriate.