Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tool(s) Assembly #583

Closed
DanFaria opened this issue Jun 1, 2021 · 8 comments · Fixed by #588
Closed

Tool(s) Assembly #583

DanFaria opened this issue Jun 1, 2021 · 8 comments · Fixed by #588

Comments

@DanFaria
Copy link
Contributor

DanFaria commented Jun 1, 2021

I just noticed we changed Tool Assembly to Tools Assembly, which is grammatically incorrect.
Tool assembly is a (spaced or open) compound noun, and it already means an assembly of tools, much like cat food means food for cats (and not a single cat).

@martin-nc
Copy link

Yes, you're right. @korbinib sorry - I was a bit hasty in approving that change. I was assuming it was a term already used in that world. I guess from @DanFaria's comment there isn't a standard term.

Just as an afterthought: if it isn't a standard term, then what else do people call these things? Is there a more commonly-used term for tool assemblies?

@korbinib
Copy link
Collaborator

korbinib commented Jun 1, 2021

It has been Tools assemblies on the menu and the other parts. Hence I adapted this on the NeLS description and elsewhere to establish consistency. I was somehow assuming there was an earlier discussion on this with the opposite outcome. Should we role back things? [And we will have to be careful about the currently drafted tool"s?" assemblies and the upcoming event.]

@korbinib
Copy link
Collaborator

korbinib commented Jun 1, 2021

Just as an afterthought: if it isn't a standard term, then what else do people call these things? Is there a more commonly-used term for tool assemblies?

I think toolkit is used more often, but too close to the RDMkit I assume?

@martin-nc
Copy link

Oh, I hadn't noticed the spelling in the menu! I've just Googled 'tool assemblies', 'tools assemblies', 'tool assemblies bioinformatics' and related phrases, but couldn't find anywhere that people used those terms (outside ELIXIR, at least). I'm not aware of a formal decision being made about the terminology, but perhaps there was.

If the decision needed to be made now then my vote would be to revert it back, but if it wasn't urgent then maybe it would be something to discuss at the next meeting?

@bedroesb
Copy link
Member

bedroesb commented Jun 1, 2021

Did something change recently? Because I have been using Tools assembly the way it is now on the website for quite some time now. If we decide on changing it please ping me so I can change/check it everywhere! I remember we had a discussion about this in the past with @floradanna but don't remember the details.

@martin-nc
Copy link

@bedroesb I think the only thing that has changed on the site is that @korbinib added 'Tools assembly' to the style guide (#571) because that is what we already use, but @DanFaria is pointing out that it's not grammatically correct. It should be 'Tool assembly'.

@DanFaria
Copy link
Contributor Author

DanFaria commented Jun 1, 2021

I remember it being "tool assembly" in the menu before. Not sure how long ago.
Carole always talked about tool assemblies, so not sure we should be looking for an alternative term without her on the loop.
Anyway, tool assembly does exist as a term in the industry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tool_management#Tool_assemblies

@floradanna
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi, I don't remember how it was called before or why it was changed.
Whatever the name is, it must be grammatically correct. So, I suggest to change it to make it grammatically correct everywhere.

I am not sure if the same grammar rule apply to other cases, such as "Tool list" vs "Tools list" or "Tools table" vs "Tool table". These are words that maybe have been used.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants