On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 15:02:07 -0400, Steve Smith wrote: >I don't understand IBM's insistence on "data set", which is a generic >phrase equivalent to "set of data". "Dataset" has been in use for decades >to mean a collection of records organized in particular ways and stored on >a computer system, particularly on our architecture. > >Anyway, that's my perception. Common phrases can be used as jargon, or >terms of art, but in this case, there's value in making it one word to >provide some clarity. > Consistency. Any style manual of any organization that has a style manual will enumerate suggested usages, and probably refer to a general dictionary (publisher, edition) for additional information. An obstacle to clarity is use of two different words to mean the same thing. I've submitted RCFs asking, "Do these two words mean the same thing? If so, why not use only one of them?"
IBM flipped a coin and chose "data set" over "dataset". It's probably in the glossary, and it doesn't mean "modem". We should be happy with it. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
