[ckan-discuss] s/package/data set/g

Anna Powell-Smith annapowellsmith at okfn.org
Tue Jul 26 10:49:55 BST 2011 

"package" certainly confused me. To the point where, the first time I
tried to use CKAN, I confidently told Rufus that there was no way to
add datasets.

Though I see the concerns about using "dataset" when you are really
dealing with metadata. Again I only worked out recently that packages
were actually metadata.

Perhaps you could fix this by changing the verb as well as the noun:
"List a dataset" rather than "Add a dataset"? And on the
list-a-dataset page, an intro sentence explaining what the heck this
actually means.

Currently, there is a proliferation of vocabulary, which I've noticed
is very characteristic of CKAN - for all the right reasons, to do with
diversity, I know!

Imagine you are a new user, looking through the menu from left to right:

* Home: "dataset collections"
* Search: (RHS) "dataset" and "package" both used, both "add" and "register"
* Add a package: nearly a full house - "data package", "data set",
"package" and "dataset"
* Upload data: redirect, red banner, "Not authorized to upload files"

I would pick one term and stick with it remorselessly, whatever it is.

Of course, this should really be part of a wider UX project :)

2011/7/26 Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas at deri.org>:
>
>> Would renaming from "package" to "dataset" be confusing?
>
> I can't answer the question because I don't know about the users, yet.
> FYI: in the context of the Linked Data world and in special of VoID we
> simply call it a 'dataset description' ;)
>
> Cheers,
>        Michael
> --
> Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
> LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
> DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
> NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
> Ireland, Europe
> Tel. +353 91 495730
> http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
> http://sw-app.org/about.html
>
> On 26 Jul 2011, at 09:23, Jindřich Mynarz wrote:
>
>> Michael,
>>
>> I'm not aware of any study of CKAN users: my belief that using the
>> term "dataset" instead of "package" would confuse users stems only
>> from a personal experience, which tells me that "dataset" in the
>> context of CKAN is quite prone to misinterpretation. For instance,
>> when we announced that we have added over hundred packages to Czech
>> CKAN [1], there was a blog post saying that we have released
>> "datasets" themselves (instead of their mere description). Also, I
>> remember that I needed to explain a couple to times to various people
>> that CKAN does not contain the data, but only metadata.
>>
>> I agree with Rufus that the distinction between a "dataset" and a
>> "pointer" to a dataset is getting a bit blurry, since there are links
>> to direct download in CKAN and also, in some cases, data are stored in
>> the CKAN web store [2]. I guess there is no "right" answer to this and
>> I think we need a pragmatic decision based on how the terms "dataset"
>> and "package" are being used in the context of CKAN. Do the users have
>> hard time grasping what "package" is? Would users be confused if CKAN
>> used "dataset" instead (would they expect to find data in CKAN instead
>> of metadata)? Would renaming from "package" to "dataset" be confusing?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Jindrich
>>
>> [1] http://cz.ckan.net
>> [2] http://wiki.ckan.net/Webstore
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Michael Hausenblas
>> <michael.hausenblas at deri.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm still +1 re dataset but if the majority thinks that package is the
>>> 'better' term (for whatever 'better' means in this context) I guess I'll
>>> just shut up.
>>>
>>>>>> I'm certainly -1 on this because I think it might confuse the users.
>>>
>>> Jindra, that's an interesting question. Who *are* the users? Can anyone
>>> point me to a precise definition of what we consider a profile of a
>>> typical
>>> and maybe a not-so-typical (aka power user), please? Maybe I've missed
>>> this
>>> one ...
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>       Michael
>>> --
>>> Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
>>> LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
>>> DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
>>> NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
>>> Ireland, Europe
>>> Tel. +353 91 495730
>>> http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
>>> http://sw-app.org/about.html
>>>
>>> On 26 Jul 2011, at 08:27, Tim McNamara wrote:
>>>
>>>> I personally prefer 'package' also. My thinking was that dataset would
>>>> be less confusing. From Jindřich's comments, that assumption may not
>>>> be valid and there are probably more important tickets to work on.
>>>>
>>>> Have we had any direct complaints? If not, I suggest that we focus on
>>>> other areas.
>>>>
>>>> 2011/7/26 Pablo Mendes <pablomendes at gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you guys discussed what to do with "resources" when package
>>>>> becomes
>>>>> dataset? Datasets continue containing resources? Or datasets contain
>>>>> datasets?
>>>>>
>>>>> I didn't really have anything against package. Does "data package"
>>>>> please
>>>>> greeks and trojans?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> Pablo
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 25, 2011 10:45 AM, "Jindřich Mynarz" <mynarzjindrich at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm certainly -1 on this because I think it might confuse the users.
>>>>>> The package is not the dataset, it's a *description* (metadata) of the
>>>>>> dataset [1]. Maybe it's not the best term to use, but it's better than
>>>>>> to lead users to expect they can find the datasets themselves at the
>>>>>> Data Hub.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jindrich
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MagrittePipe.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Rufus Pollock
>>>>>> <rufus.pollock at okfn.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 25 July 2011 05:17, Michael Hausenblas
>>>>>>> <michael.hausenblas at deri.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think that the term "package" should be removed from
>>>>>>>>> thedatahub.org
>>>>>>>>> and replaced with "data set" or "dataset". While CKAN is to be the
>>>>>>>>> Debian of data, I think "dataset" would lead to fewer mental steps
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> new comers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This has already been discussed quite a lot (e.g. it's one of the
>>>>>>> items on the UX refactor page: <http://wiki.ckan.net/UX>) and I think
>>>>>>> there is general agreement on this. The issue here is that it is a
>>>>>>> (relatively) costly refactor so we are waiting for the right time to
>>>>>>> do it (we can try doing it slightly 'hackily' by just using i18n but
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>> think this is a short term approach).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rufus
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> ckan-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> ckan-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-discuss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> ckan-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> ckan-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>>>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> ckan-discuss mailing list
>>>>> ckan-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ckan-discuss mailing list
>>>> ckan-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ckan-discuss mailing list
>>> ckan-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-discuss
>>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ckan-discuss mailing list
> ckan-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-discuss
>

More information about the ckan-discuss mailing list