nomenclature: identifying versus classifying

[Richard Jensen]

On Sun, 15 Oct 2000, Curtis Clark wrote:

> What I mean by this is that a name is assigned to a "thing" s. lat., be it
> a physical object or a group of objects or a group of groups, or whatever,
> without the name carrying with it any information about the place of that
> thing in a larger structure or the internal structure of the thing. The
> best example is the automatic generation of an index field in a database,
> with sequential numbers. Every number unambiguously refers to a record in
> the database, but no other information is expressed or implied. The
> database itself has structure--is a classification, if you will--but an
> individual record number has meaning only in the context of the database.
> And changes in the database will not cause the association between a
> specific record number and its record to change.

But, because the index numbers are sequentially applied, they
automatically represent a hierarchy (usually the sequence is a
chronological sequence based on when each record was created) and do
provide information about the records (i.e., the order of entry).

Richard J. Jensen      |   E-MAIL: rjensen at saintmarys.edu
Dept. of Biology       |   TELEPHONE: 219-284-4674
Saint Mary's College   |   FAX: 219-284-4716
Notre Dame, IN  46556  |