[GRASS-dev] terminology issues in grass7

Michael Barton michael.barton at asu.edu
Fri Aug 8 12:15:26 EDT 2008


On Aug 8, 2008, at 9:00 AM, <grass-dev-request at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:

> Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 10:27:33 +0300
> From: Wolf Bergenheim <wolf+grass at bergenheim.net>
> Subject: Re: [GRASS-dev] terminology issues in grass7
> To: Martin Landa <landa.martin at gmail.com>
> Cc: GRASS developers list <grass-dev at lists.osgeo.org>
> Message-ID: <489BF565.70002 at bergenheim.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 07.08.2008 20:22, Martin Landa wrote:
>
>>
>> GRASS is basically layer-based GIS, in grass6 we call layers as maps,
>> e.g. raster map. I would suggest to use in grass7 'layer' instead
>>
>> * raster layer
>> * 3d raster layer
>> * vector layer
>>
>> 'Map' could be used for composition of layers. And to rename all the
>> arguments ('map' -> 'layer').
>>
>> 'Layer' is currently used for vectors. Original term 'field number'
>> seems to me as a better choice. It would mean at the end to rename
>> also all 'layer' parameters to 'field'.
>>

I agree with changing map to layers and using map to refer to the  
composited group of layers.

However, I disagree with using "field number" for the features that  
are now called "layers" in vectors. These are "key fields" or "keys"  
in standard DBMS terminology for linking the vector table with the  
attribute table. I propose using "key" or "keyfield".

Michael


>
> Yes, that would conform more with the terminology of most other GIS:es
> out there. Especially the vector layer is very confusing for people  
> who
> switch to GRASS. The renaming the layer parameters might need a lot of
> manual work, or maybe we can device a script to do it.



More information about the grass-dev mailing list