Here is another aggregated reply, this time about the naming.
I agree that #subobject is not ideal. I agree that "object" has
technical connotations, but not that they are necessarily related to
anything specific; it's just a very general term that has all kinds of
meanings in all kinds of areas. My wife laughed at me when I told her
that we call the "objects" that are associated with "subjects"
"subobjects" :-D
There are two naming strategies: (1) use a name that refers to the
"object" or (2) use a name that refers to the "group" of property-value
pairs. Maybe *named* subobjects should be based on (1) while anonymous
ones could be based on (2). Here are some variants for each:
(1) object, subobject, entity, thing, element, component, part, description
(2) group, vector, collection, bag, container
I would avoid entity/thing as too vague, and vector since it suggests an
ordering of content. Maybe one should have parser functions that suggest
an action as opposed to a thing that the action creates. For instance,
we could have
{{#describe:My office address| ...}}
A related question is: how should the property be called that relates
pages to their subobjects. It now is called "has subobject" but this
just comes from the current name #subobject. I also found "subobject"
hard to translate into other languages (English is still least weird
since there are many such technical terms in computer English). A less
technical choice of words might help there.
Markus
On 24/10/11 18:00, John McClure wrote:
> Are embedded subobjects something like
> {{#subobject: objname | objpropname= {{#subobject: subobjname |
> subobjpropname=x}}
> }}
> I am mystified by the {{{given}}}...{{{family}}} parameter - how is it
> used/referenced? More than one? Positional?
> I don't think subobject is technically accurate, nor object for that
> matter, as these technically connote behavior.
> How about "vector"?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Jon Lang [mailto:datawea...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 23, 2011 3:48 PM
> *To:* Yury Katkov
> *Cc:* Semediawiki-user; Markus Krötzsch; Semantic MediaWiki developers
> *Subject:* Re: [SMW-devel] RFC Subobjects (aka "internal objects") in SMW
>
> Sorry for the late response.
>
> Would it be reasonable to have the syntax be something like:
>
> {{#subobject:name
> | given=Jonathan
> | family=Lang
> | middle=LeRoy
> | surname=Mr.
> | {{{given}}} {{{middle}}} {{{family}}}
> }}
>
> {{#subobject:name
> | given=Ranma
> | family=Saotome
> | {{{family}}} {{{given}}}
> }}
>
> This way, the subobject's formatting could be determined on a
> case-by-case basis, and in a manner that people are used to (i.e.,
> value on the left; display on the right). In effect, the unnamed
> entry is assumed to contain an "inline template" for display
> purposes. This saves you the trouble of writing a new template every
> time you want to format a subobject differently.
>
> If no inline template is given, there should be a default inline
> template on the property page; possibly use the property page itself
> /as/ the default template, and rely on the usual tricks used by
> template pages to define text that should only be available when
> viewing the property page and text that should only be available
> when making use of it as a template.
>
> BTW: "subobject" is technically accurate, but needlessly long. I'd
> recommend going with "object" instead. Granted, this is a nitpick;
> but there you are.
>
> --
> Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook
in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps
for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple
it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
