[GRASS-dev] terminology issues in grass7

[Moritz Lennert]

On 10/08/08 17:25, Michael Barton wrote:
> 
> On Aug 9, 2008, at 2:54 PM, <grass-dev-request at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
> 
>> Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2008 23:45:27 +0200
>> From: Maciej Sieczka <tutey at o2.pl>
>> Subject: Re: [GRASS-dev] terminology issues in grass7
>> To: grass-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> Cc: Martin Landa <landa.martin at gmail.com>,    Michael Barton
>>     <michael.barton at asu.edu>
>> Message-ID: <489E0FF7.7010002 at o2.pl>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> Michael Barton pisze:
>>
>>> I agree with changing map to layers and using map to refer to the
>>> composited group of layers.
>>
>> Sounds alright to me as well.
>>
>>> 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".
>>
>> In GRASS there is already a term "key column" (the column that links the
>> category number with the table row). Since terms "field" and "column"
>> are sometimes used interchangeably, and term "key column" is already a
>> part of GRASS terminology, using "keyfield" for something different will
>> lead to confussion.
> 
> "I don't think this is official", but the cat field certainly IS a key 
> field to link vectors and attribute tables--more so than layers. So I 
> agree that this would be confusing.
> 
>>
>>
>> May I suggest "table link" in place of the current "layer" then? So each
>> vector map can have multilpe "table links", and each "table" can have
>> it's own "key column".
> 
> This sounds reasonable to me too. It clearly describes what the feature 
> does.

Well, to be absolutely precise, you don't need linked attribute tables 
to have multiple layers, so I'm not sure that reducing the layer concept 
to table links is really 100% correct.

But I have nothing to suggest as an alternative. I don't find "layer" 
that confusing, but then again, I'm probably just too used to it.

Moritz