Re: [lexidma] wording issues

On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 at 19:46, Michal MÄchura <462258@mail.muni.cz> wrote:

I suggest the other way around: let's call them (the model-level things that have properties) "object types".

I would prefer it this way because "data types" can be confused with literal data types in a specific serialization, eg. column types in SQL (int, nvarchar etc.) or values types in JSON (string, boolean etc).

"Object types" is what I was aiming for in the prose, but it's likely I didn't always apply that consistently.

M.

po 7. 8. 2023 vÂ14:43 odesÃlatel MiloÅ JakubÃÄek <milos.jakubicek@sketchengine.eu> napsal:
Hi all,

In addition to what we discussed today, I just also noticed that the document is interchangeably using "object" and "data type" -- sometimes quite confusingly. Unless someoneÂobjects, I'll make a PR changing all occurrences to "data type" which seems to be more frequent.

(As discussed, a "data type" has then individual "properties")

Best
Milos

Milos Jakubicek

CEO, Lexical Computing
Brno, CZ | Brighton, UK
http://www.lexicalcomputing.com
http://www.sketchengine.eu

lexidma message