The question seems to be whether "temporal" can be substituted for the word "time", particularly in text about data. I would suggest (firmly) that the answer is no. My arguments are as follows:
- Time data is not data related to time as a concept, or to the idea of time as it pertains to human thinking. It is data about points in time, specific measured moments on a clock. Even that data is not about the punctual nature of the measurement itself. It is about the contingent event or marker it serves to measure. In other words, when you store a time in a database, you're not concerned so much about the clock reading itself as you are about what happened at the instant you or your equipment took the reading. "Temporal" applies to the idea, the concept of time in its role within human thinking. I oppose ideas and data in my mind - not that they contradict one another, but conceptually they should be kept separate. An idea is not as valuable if it is not based on data, but data does not constitute an idea.
- The sheer clarity of the phrase "time data" is compelling. The data describes a reading of hours, minutes, seconds and milliseconds (or something else entirely, such a a counter in the case of atomic clocks or computer CPUs). It would sound pedantic to talk of "temporal data" just as it would sound pedantic to say "spatial data" when you actually mean "size measurements". I believe it would also be misleading.
I thought I would mention that "temporal" (related to the temple) and "temporal" (related to the concept of time) do not share a common origin. One comes from the latin templum/i meaning open or consecrated space, the other comes from the latin tempus/oris meaning time. It's tempting to think they are somehow related, but they're really not. Latin, like English, was a mix and match of several varied original languages and words that looked like one another did not necessarily have common ancestry or connected meaning.
Finally, I think the reason that "temporal" has come to be the antonym of "sacred" in English is through the dichotomy of life and death, or more specifically Godliness versus mortality. We are mortals, and Time is our enemy. Gods are eternal, free from Time's grip. The fundamental theology of the Romans, inherited from the Greeks, starts with the Titan Saturnus (Chronos, the spirit of Time) being defeated by his son Jupiter (Zeus) thus granting all Gods their immortality. From mortal versus immortal, the idea of secular versus sacred is thus attached to the concept of Time.
Perhaps one exception to my suggestion of not using "temporal" as a replacement for "time" in technical manuals and papers would be when talking about "spatiotemporal" data, which describes data related to space-time, keeping in mind that space-time is something quite different from the simple amalgam of space and time. So perhaps not so much an exception as a warning about a possible false association.