{"title":"Human Readability of Data Files.","authors":"Michael Robert Gryk","doi":"10.4242/balisagevol27.gryk01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this era of big data and FAIR data, data formats must be machine interpretable. XML, among other standards, satisfies this requirement. Yet many standardization initiatives cite human readability as a second, key property in data format development. Examples include the development of STAR in the field of structural biology, W3C PROV for provenance, and even the continuing development of XML. This begs the question(s), what is meant by human readability and can this property be measured for a given data format or compared between competing standards? The broad topic of readability is considered with attention to the various aspects of written text which either foster or counter readability. Drawing on efforts in the educational system, a metric is proposed for estimating the relative human readability of structured data within an archival file format. Comparison is made between the same data represented in various formats, including JSON and XML, to help judge whether these standards have accomplished their simultaneous goals of machine interpretability and human readability.</p>","PeriodicalId":89326,"journal":{"name":"Balisage series on markup technologies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11034916/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Balisage series on markup technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4242/balisagevol27.gryk01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In this era of big data and FAIR data, data formats must be machine interpretable. XML, among other standards, satisfies this requirement. Yet many standardization initiatives cite human readability as a second, key property in data format development. Examples include the development of STAR in the field of structural biology, W3C PROV for provenance, and even the continuing development of XML. This begs the question(s), what is meant by human readability and can this property be measured for a given data format or compared between competing standards? The broad topic of readability is considered with attention to the various aspects of written text which either foster or counter readability. Drawing on efforts in the educational system, a metric is proposed for estimating the relative human readability of structured data within an archival file format. Comparison is made between the same data represented in various formats, including JSON and XML, to help judge whether these standards have accomplished their simultaneous goals of machine interpretability and human readability.
在这个大数据和 FAIR 数据时代,数据格式必须是机器可解释的。XML 和其他标准都能满足这一要求。然而,许多标准化计划都将人类可读性作为数据格式开发的第二个关键属性。这方面的例子包括结构生物学领域 STAR 的开发、W3C PROV 的出处,甚至 XML 的持续开发。这就引出了一个问题:什么是人类可读性,这一特性是否可以针对特定数据格式进行测量或在竞争性标准之间进行比较?我们在考虑可读性这一广泛话题时,会关注书面文本中促进或抵消可读性的各个方面。借鉴教育系统的努力,我们提出了一种衡量标准,用于估算档案文件格式中结构化数据的相对人类可读性。对以 JSON 和 XML 等各种格式表示的相同数据进行比较,以帮助判断这些标准是否同时实现了机器可解释性和人类可读性的目标。