Steven, you wrote,
----- Original Message -----
From: "Howard Friedman" <[log in to unmask]>
> We have to remember that discographical data is "data", not "text",
> and it is important that it be normalized, properly structured, etc.
>
> Data are "data" Data is the plural form of datum, which is a single piece of
data.
>
Nonetheless, virtually all discographic data is...or can be digitally
compiled as...TEXT! Numeric data only needs to be stored as integers
or floating-point data when/if used for calculations (which catalog
and matrix numbers are NOT...?!). In fact, all the data found on a
record label exists in text form, which is then either printed on
that label or placed in the "wax" by some process. The exceptions.
of course, would be actual scanner-generated images of the label
and digital versions of the record's sonic contents; while both
COULD be generated, keep in mind that there may exist as many
as three million or more different phonorecords...so saving such
items immediately begins to necessitate VERY large drives...?!
Steven C. Barr
What I was saying was, the word "data" is a plural noun, and refers to a collection of inividual pieces of information, each known as a "datum." It is incorrect to say "Data is" anything, the correct form and grammar being "data are" whatever.
So am I just being a stodgy old fuss budgeit? It's just like Garry Moore's old saw about "Winston's taste good like a cigarette should, which just about ruined the English language for a generation or more, since the correct form is "as a cigarette should." Ya know, er, um, like, etc.!
Gets worse and worse, doesn't it?
Howard
|