OrderState doesn't align with hasOrderStatus

[mkllnk]

The ontology talks about a status.

https://github.com/datafoodconsortium/ontology/blob/f16a51fca35d36670e0f32ff156a6f27ac9518cb/src/DFC_BusinessOntology.rdf#L996

But the vocabulary talks about a state. https://github.com/datafoodconsortium/taxonomies/blob/5f4694ddc705e2da3a3ac4e686dbda1606655003/vocabulary.rdf#L28

Is that intentional?

I tried to find a good answer to which word is more appropriate but it's not clear to me. We can use either but I suggest to be consistent. Otherwise I keep typing the wrong method name.

• https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/219351/state-or-status-when-should-a-variable-name-contain-the-word-state-and-w
• https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1162816/naming-conventions-state-versus-status
• https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/12958/status-vs-state
• Google "orders status" yields 215M vs "order state" 1.7M. :shrug:

[RaggedStaff]

Arrrgh!!!

I think this is one of those situations where the flexibility of English is a problem. State (as in condition) is a synonym of Status (as in condition) but they both have a bunch of other definitions; check out Collins - we're using definition 8 🙄

I think technically State is more grammatically correct as it's a "countable noun" vs Status (see definitions 4 & 5) which is uncountable (e.g. if I have 6 Orders - 3 can be in an Open state, 2 in Closed and 1 in Draft). but its also probably confusing, esp to non-native speakers, and would more typically be used in the sense of "Government" or "Province/Country".

I agree it makes sense to align, I'm happy either way. I suspect Status is probably more internationally accessible. It would also only involve a non-breaking change to vocabulary.rdf (deprecate the various states, set them to sameAS replacement status), not the ontology, which feels easier.

@Alcoz - wondering what you think ?