Woops, I read this too fast the first time. The name `biom_data` would would without conflicts. `data` by itself would be strange and confusing to R users, because `data` is already an special core function that loads example data into the workspace. It takes strings or symbols as its first argument, and then goes and grabs and loads the corresponding data from available loaded packages. 

Semantically I can see why `data` makes sense, just won't play well in the R environment. 

Seems like either `biom_data` or `observation_data` would both work fine semantically. I tend to like shorter names, so my vote would be for `biom_data`.

Is that alright? I'm glad I double-checked. Was about to start renaming...