TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: User friendly term for Metadata From:"Parks, Beverly" <ParksB -at- EMH1 -dot- HQISEC -dot- ARMY -dot- MIL> Date:Wed, 28 Apr 1999 08:00:48 -0700
Hi, Pete.
How about calling the views "custom views" instead of "custom data views"
and moving the "data" term to the next level, instead of using "metadata".
This way, they would be building custom views using data fields. It's one
less level of data abstraction for them to grok.
Bev Parks
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pete swisher [SMTP:PSwisher -at- QUARK -dot- COM]
>
> Metadata means "data about data." In the software I'm documenting, an end
> user can build custom data views using metadata fields. For example, I
> could
> choose the file name, file location, thumbnail, and file size metadata
> fields in building such a data view. Then, when I view a file, I only see
> that information.
>
> However, I feel metadata could be intimidating to our end users. Our
> audience ranges from sys admins to librarians. A possible choice is
> "header", but that's a little vague. Does anyone have some good
> suggestions?
>
>
