Surfaced by the #159 sweep. #159 ruled on exactly one term (semantic layer → セマンティックレイヤー); these are different terms with potentially different answers, so they are recorded rather than folded into that card.
content/blog/enterprise-ontology-race-open-vs-closed/index.ja.mdx renders several other semantic X phrases with the same 意味-prefix construction:
| ja |
English source |
note |
意味ビュー |
Snowflake Semantic View Autopilot |
a product feature name — Snowflake's own Japanese material calls it セマンティックビュー |
意味モデル / 意味モデリング |
semantic model / semantic modeling |
セマンティックモデル is the usual rendering, and is Microsoft's own term for the Fabric/Power BI artifact |
意味グラフ |
semantic graph (Dataplex → Knowledge Catalog) |
|
意味整合 |
semantic alignment |
descriptive prose, most likely fine as-is |
意味論 (semantics) also appears and is correct — that is the standard Japanese word and is not in question.
Why this is worth a decision rather than a blanket sweep
The #159 ruling turned on a specific piece of evidence: the category is named セマンティックレイヤー in the field, and 意味層 shows up in the same writing only as a gloss. That evidence does not transfer automatically. Two of the four above are different in kind:
意味ビュー is a proper noun. Semantic View is Snowflake's feature name. Translating a product's feature name at all is a different call from translating a category, and the same table already keeps Fabric IQ, Unity Catalog and Business Semantics in English.意味モデル is a category term but also Microsoft's product-facing term, which pushes toward セマンティックモデル.
意味グラフ and 意味整合 are ordinary descriptive prose and may well be fine.
So this needs the same treatment #159 got — check observable Japanese usage per term, then rule — not a find-and-replace.
Retrieval angle
Same argument as #159: a Japanese reader searching Snowflake's feature types セマンティックビュー. This post is the site's main comparison of the five platforms, so it is the page most likely to be the retrieval target for those vendor terms.
Scope
Body prose in content/blog/enterprise-ontology-race-open-vs-closed/index.ja.mdx (8 occurrences). Worth widening the sweep to the other index.ja.mdx files, which this pass did not check for these four terms — it only counted 意味層.
Not queued — recorded for triage.
Generated by Claude Code
Surfaced by the #159 sweep. #159 ruled on exactly one term (
semantic layer→セマンティックレイヤー); these are different terms with potentially different answers, so they are recorded rather than folded into that card.content/blog/enterprise-ontology-race-open-vs-closed/index.ja.mdxrenders several othersemantic Xphrases with the same意味-prefix construction:意味ビューセマンティックビュー意味モデル/意味モデリングセマンティックモデルis the usual rendering, and is Microsoft's own term for the Fabric/Power BI artifact意味グラフ意味整合意味論(semantics) also appears and is correct — that is the standard Japanese word and is not in question.Why this is worth a decision rather than a blanket sweep
The #159 ruling turned on a specific piece of evidence: the category is named
セマンティックレイヤーin the field, and意味層shows up in the same writing only as a gloss. That evidence does not transfer automatically. Two of the four above are different in kind:意味ビューis a proper noun. Semantic View is Snowflake's feature name. Translating a product's feature name at all is a different call from translating a category, and the same table already keepsFabric IQ,Unity CatalogandBusiness Semanticsin English.意味モデルis a category term but also Microsoft's product-facing term, which pushes towardセマンティックモデル.意味グラフand意味整合are ordinary descriptive prose and may well be fine.So this needs the same treatment #159 got — check observable Japanese usage per term, then rule — not a find-and-replace.
Retrieval angle
Same argument as #159: a Japanese reader searching Snowflake's feature types
セマンティックビュー. This post is the site's main comparison of the five platforms, so it is the page most likely to be the retrieval target for those vendor terms.Scope
Body prose in
content/blog/enterprise-ontology-race-open-vs-closed/index.ja.mdx(8 occurrences). Worth widening the sweep to the otherindex.ja.mdxfiles, which this pass did not check for these four terms — it only counted意味層.Not queued — recorded for triage.
Generated by Claude Code