Function names

[karoliskoncevicius]

@christophsax I noticed you left a comment about the possibility of changing marry() to a different name. Maybe we can stick with object_operation notation and use series_ for functions that work on that level. (or alternatively swissdata_)

In this case marry might be renamed to series_combine().

But not sure if test_swissdata() should also be renamed to series_test(). And wether or not to rename read_swissdata_s3() to series_read_s3() (or swissdata_read_s3()).

Maybe you have comments/preferences about this?

[karoliskoncevicius]

Also do you think test in test_swissdata() is a good name?

I am thinking check or validate would be better?

[karoliskoncevicius]

Also should write_swissdata() be renamed to write_swissdata_yaml() or even moved to dataseries as the s3 version is?

[christophsax]

@KKPMW

How about renaming the object class from 'swissdata' to 'dataset'?

swissdata is the first organizational module of this project, dataseries is the second, and both can work with 'dataset' objects.

In the swissdata, we started to call them just a 'set', but this leads to confusing function names (like set_download).

If everything is called 'dataset', we could have:

• dataset_write_s3, ...
• dataset_validate
• dataset_merge (instead of marry?)

Of course open for better names.

[christophsax]

And if we are at it: rename write_swissdata to dataset_write_yaml. We will have a JSON version later on.