[GRASS-dev] terminology issues in grass7

[Michael Barton]

On Jun 17, 2009, at 6:21 AM, grass-dev-request at lists.osgeo.org wrote:

> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 06:58:44 -0600
> From: Roger Miller <roger at spinn.net>
> Subject: [GRASS-dev] terminology issues in grass7
> To: "grass-dev at lists.osgeo.org" <grass-dev at lists.osgeo.org>
> Message-ID: <1245243524.4369.15.camel at linux>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> Folks,
>
> The terminology discussion has evolved into a discussion on usage.
> That's constructive but it really doesn't do much to solve the initial
> problem.
>
> I noticed that most of the participants in the discussion are using  
> the
> term "layer" frequently and usually without problems in agreeing to  
> its
> meaning.  Does that indicate that the term should continue in its
> current usage?
>
> It seems to me that most of you are talking about a "layer" as a  
> visual
> component of a map.  The usage in the existing GRASS command is not a
> visual component, but a database feature.  Recent discussions have
> revealed that the "layer=" feature by itself doesn't create a unique  
> or
> easily manipulated visual feature.  That seems to confuse the usage.
>
> The "layer=" feature of the commands seems to me to be largely if not
> entirely superfluous.  The function that it performs can be duplicated
> by "where=" and/or "catlist=".  Further, the term "layer" is widely  
> used
> with other meanings in fields where GIS is applied and that leads to
> confusion.
>
> I have a GUI of my own design that I use for GRASS.  I used the term
> "layer" frequently when I first wrote the scripts and it is still  
> firmly
> imbedded in the script, but after some confusion over the term I  
> removed
> it from all the widgets and documentation.  I also had only a limited
> need to replace the term with something else.  The context was always
> clear enough that I didn't need to use the term.
>
>
> Roger Miller

I agree. This is the point I'm trying to make. Thanks.

Michael