(support) Wording: "schema" or "database"?

[donquixote]

Hello, I see two different names for what is conceptually a "collection of tables" in Molgenis.

• In the UI, it is called a "database" almost consistently. E.g. the dialog would say "Delete database".
• In GraphQL, it is called a "schema". E.g. there is a mutation deleteSchema.
• In PostgreSQL it is called "schema", while the database is (I think) the greater thing that contains multiple schemas.

The term "schema" is also used in the UI, but here it is exclusively used to refer to the actual definition of a database structure.

Why do I care? I am writing a php client that connects to Molgenis, and would like to keep the naming future-proof :)

[mswertz]

what would you prefer as naming?

because you are right we now are inconsistent using 'database' from a user perspective and 'schema' from a more technical perspective.

[donquixote]

what would you prefer as naming?

I have no clear opinion. I think I tend towards the labels found in the UI. I think you have to look at the broader picture, and choose consistent and distinct names for collections on all levels. E.g. if "pet store" is a "database", then what do you call the higher-level collection that may contain a pet store and other databases? Perhaps a "space"? I think for regular users, "schema" it not that great to refer to something like "pet store". It is ok for the schema.yml file but I don't think it is the suitable term to refer to a database with its data.

Maybe you find that it is too disruptive to fully rename things now. In that case, perhaps you just need to be explicit about it in documentation and UI labels.