subActivityCollection names would benefit from beeing descriptive
whether one is shared by several parents (Activities) or not remain to be decided (rock types for caving and rock types for climbing, or just rock types?)
naming in itself would benefit from beeing intuitive and descriptive
vocabularies are stored in a list of vocabularies, not a tree, hence no parent, hence names should probably convey context (as there is no metadata either)
This is a general issue, not only related to "rockTypeAndOtherMaterial", but many more and some parts of ActivityJSON.
Example 1:
"rockTypeAndOtherMaterial" does not really convey the idea of "all things than can contain caves". The question arises: rock type and other material ... for what? Is sand or grass included? I'm thinking about the accessibilty of the code, how easy it is to understand by a third party.
Example 2:
"morphology" as a term refers to form, while the data we put in it describes formative processes and the environment, enclosing material, in which the cave has formed.
Examples 1 & 2 of course stem from the initial difficulties in building a classification system. Classification of caves has been attempted for decades, and no world-wide accepted single standard exist. The one we have coined here is quite usable given the planned use of the software, but the names given to things at an earlier stage might now need a fresh-up.
Example 3:
On the other hand, saunaType and urbanexTarget are great names.
Example 4:
skiMaterial is ok, but still brings to mind the material of the skis themselves. Would there be a term for the material one skis on? Maybe skiingMaterial?
Example 5:
swimmingPlace of course lists waterbodies (sea, lake, ...) but it is not obvious from the name. Intuitively, it would mean pool, shore, something...
jariarkko
commented
4 years ago
subActivityCollection names would benefit from beeing descriptive
This is a general issue, not only related to "rockTypeAndOtherMaterial", but many more and some parts of ActivityJSON.
Example 1: "rockTypeAndOtherMaterial" does not really convey the idea of "all things than can contain caves". The question arises: rock type and other material ... for what? Is sand or grass included? I'm thinking about the accessibilty of the code, how easy it is to understand by a third party.
Example 2: "morphology" as a term refers to form, while the data we put in it describes formative processes and the environment, enclosing material, in which the cave has formed.
Examples 1 & 2 of course stem from the initial difficulties in building a classification system. Classification of caves has been attempted for decades, and no world-wide accepted single standard exist. The one we have coined here is quite usable given the planned use of the software, but the names given to things at an earlier stage might now need a fresh-up.
Example 3: On the other hand, saunaType and urbanexTarget are great names.
Example 4: skiMaterial is ok, but still brings to mind the material of the skis themselves. Would there be a term for the material one skis on? Maybe skiingMaterial?
Example 5: swimmingPlace of course lists waterbodies (sea, lake, ...) but it is not obvious from the name. Intuitively, it would mean pool, shore, something...