[Esip-preserve] Identifiers

[Mark A. Parsons]

I don't think there is a falsifiable definition of data set. Or rather all definitions are false. It's very situational.

Cheers,

-m. 
On 16 Feb 2012, at 12:38 PM, Bruce Barkstrom wrote:

> If we want a falsifiable definition of "dataset", what would
> Mark classify as an "illogical arrangement of data"?
> Maybe we could call it an "undataset" or some such.
> 
> Bruce B.
> 
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Curt Tilmes <Curt.Tilmes at nasa.gov> wrote:
>> On 02/16/2012 11:12 AM, Lynnes, Christopher S. (GSFC-6102) wrote:
>>> 
>>> At the risk of muddying the waters further, would you consider
>>> deprecating the term "data set", given its ambiguity w.r.t. ISO
>>> 19115 "dataset" which is actually much closer to a granule?  Maybe
>>> use data collection instead?
>>> 
>>> On Feb 16, 2012, at 11:06 AM, Curt Tilmes wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On 02/16/2012 10:54 AM, Mark A. Parsons wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> To me a data set is simply a logical arrangement of data that has
>>>>> meaning to a designated community.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I like that definition -- it is broad enough to encompass my
>>>> definition, which I can still use within my community.
>> 
>> 
>> Well Mark's definition still fits a single granule -- it is a logical
>> arrangement of data.
>> 
>> Would my definition (ESDT+Collection) for the EOSDIS 'designated
>> community' not be accommodated as an ISO 19115 "dataset"?
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Curt Tilmes
>> U.S. Global Change Research Program
>> 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 250
>> Washington, D.C. 20006, USA
>> 
>> +1 202-419-3479 (office)
>> +1 443-987-6228 (cell)
>> _______________________________________________
>> Esip-preserve mailing list
>> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
>> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve
> _______________________________________________
> Esip-preserve mailing list
> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve