Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Minimize/harmonise talk about "entities" in primer #89

Closed
acka47 opened this issue Mar 8, 2024 · 5 comments
Closed

Minimize/harmonise talk about "entities" in primer #89

acka47 opened this issue Mar 8, 2024 · 5 comments

Comments

@acka47
Copy link

acka47 commented Mar 8, 2024

This was a topic in today's usage board meeting. If I understood correctly, @tombaker was asking for some description of how such terminology as "entity" is used and @kcoyle responded that she hopes this term does not come up at all in the spec and it does not in the vocab.

But "entity" appears four times in the OpenWEMI primer, twice in the connection "entity type" where "entity" refers to those resources that are typed as OpenWEMI classes and one time referring to the classes endeavor, work, expression, manifestation, item themselves.

It will definitely make the primer more accessible to minimize the use of this term or at least constrain its use to the WEMI classes or resources typed as such.

@kcoyle
Copy link
Collaborator

kcoyle commented Mar 8, 2024

The first use of "entity" is about FRBR, and FRBR does call them entities. I think we should leave that one, but find some other wording for the remaining ones. I know that we spend some effort in the DCTAP group to purge that model of the "entity" term, and we should do the same here. The hard part is: what term can we use? There might be some places where we can use "class" but ... not all. Since we can't add comments to github documents we can do this as a pull request where we can see the diff.

@acka47
Copy link
Author

acka47 commented Mar 11, 2024

Since we can't add comments to github documents we can do this as a pull request where we can see the diff.

I did already open a PR at #91.

The hard part is: what term can we use?

I went with "abstraction levels" and – taking from the vocab itself – "endeavor" in #91.

acka47 added a commit to acka47/openwemi that referenced this issue Mar 11, 2024
@tombaker
Copy link
Contributor

On a lighter note, Occam's razor - "the problem-solving principle that recommends searching for explanations constructed with the smallest possible set of elements" attributed to William of Ockham, a fourteen-century English philosopher - was widely paraphrased as "Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem" ("Entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity"). I'm sure he didn't have WEMI in mind, though I did when I happened to read these words.

@kcoyle
Copy link
Collaborator

kcoyle commented Mar 28, 2024

Changes made to document as per working group decisions.

@kcoyle kcoyle closed this as completed Mar 28, 2024
@acka47
Copy link
Author

acka47 commented Apr 5, 2024

Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants