Aliases: Glossary, Glossary of terms, Which word should I use?, Naming conventions, Preferred synonyms, Shades of meaning, Preferred name, Name dilemmas, Naming dilemmas, Terminology, Directory of terms
(Examples of synonym sets (or at least sets of closely-related words) where I have a hard time deciding which one is the preferred word) [Terminology (category)][Naming conventions (category)]
Contents
|
The problem
Problem: Not knowing which synonym is the “preferred” one and being inconsistent…
I don’t even know what to call this concept. “Conflicting words”? No. “Ambiguous words”? No. “Duplicate words”? Closer. “Annoying synonyms”? Closer.
The problem is: 1 concept has many words (synonyms). Which of those many words should I use?
It’d be nice to standardize on one or the other for each of these so that…
- I can be consistent
- I need only one category for each concept; it’d be a shame to have both a “duplication” and a “repetition” category, f.e.
- I need only to search for one term and not both if I want to see/find everything about that concept
When I state a preference for one, it is often a compromise. The other options may all be great candidates as well, but necessity dictates that I choose just one.
The reason for all of this is [consistency (category)]. “[Convention over configuration (category)]“. The advantages of deciding on and using just one term (when there are alternatives) consistently seem to outweigh the drawbacks, such as not having as much [flexibility (category)]…
Synsets
Synset edit
http://computing-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Synsets. Retrieved on 2007-05-11 11:18.
synonym ring – A list of words with related meanings used to broaden the scope of a word search. As well as returning documents which contain a sought-for word a search using a synonym ring might also return documents which contain words in the same synonym ring as a sought-for word. Synonym rings are produced manually and are usually specific to a certain field, e.g. legal knowhow.
Synonym ring – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synonym_ring). Retrieved on 2007-05-11 11:18.
In metadata a Synonym ring or synset, is a group of data elements that are considered semantically equivalent for the purposes of information retrieval. These data elements are frequently found in different metadata registries. Although a group of terms can be considered equivalent, metadata registries should store the synonyms at a central location called the preferred data element. According to WordNet, a synset or synonym set is defined as a set of one or more synonyms that are interchangeable in some context without changing the truth value of the proposition in which they are embedded.
Example of Synonym Ring
The following are considered semantically equivalent and for a synonym ring:
foaf:person gjxdm:Person niem:Person sumo:Human cyc:IndividualNote that each data element has two components:
- Namespace prefix which is a shorthand for the name of the metadata registry
- Data Element name The name of the object in each of the distinct metadata registry
Expression of Synonym Ring
A Synonym Ring can be expressed by a series of statements in the Web Ontology Language (OWL) using the
classequivalenceor thepropertyEquivalenceor instance equivalence statement – thesameAsproperty.
Aliases: Synonym set, Synonym sets, Synonym ring, Synonym rings, Synset, Synsets
Categories / Topic names / Titles
Also listed here are the “unpreferred” names (“these ideas were also considered before settling on …”), so you know what not to use .
Links to the unpreferred names (articles as well as categories) are provided in order that we may see at a glance (by checking for non-red links) if articles/categories for any of these unpreferred names accidentally got created. (Enforce policy.)
In the case of categories, it would be nice if we could also show a count of how many articles they contained (should be 0). Could do a category tree for each one, but can’t do that dynamically from a template, and it’s too much work to do without a template…
{ Software
Spam prevention (category), not Anti-spam (category)
web or Web or World Wide Web?
I’m actually leaning towards just using Web. There’s not much chance of ambiguity (thanks to people not using “web” very often to refer to anything else)…
Web (category), not The Web (category) (2nd choice), World Wide Web (category) (3rd choice), The World Wide Web (category), WWW (category)
Blogs (category), not Web logs (category), Weblogs (category), Blog (category)(singular)
Although I usually don’t like abbreviations, this one is ubiquitously accepted and I’ve grown used to it.
Package managers (category) or Package management systems (category)?
Undecided.
Uninformative error messages (category)
Uninformative error messages (category) — “Providing little or no information; not informative.”
Not: Uninstructive error messages (category) — “not tending to inform or clarify”
This can be considered a subcategory of: Useless error messages (category), even though I can’t think of any other types of useless error messages at the moment other than uninformative ones! So Uninformative error messages (category) may end up getting 98% of the error messages that I document.
Not: Unhelpful error messages (category).
But I think now I want to rename Useless error messages (category) to Unhelpful error messages (category)! “Useless” is a bit too strong, and “unhelpful” just sounds more like what I want to say, most of the time.
system or tool or __?
- Continuous integration systems (category)
- Comparison system (category)
but: Continuous testing tools (category) ?
ACL (category) or ACLs (category)
Currently leaning towards ACLs (category)
Input sanitization (category), Data normalization (category), Data canonicalization (category)?
I think Input sanitization (category) refers specifically (only) to preventing invalid/dangerous input. So, for example, be sure to escape everything. In the case of taking HTML as input, don’t allow dangerous tags/links (javascript links), etc.
Data normalization (category) (or sometimes Input normalization (category)) (= Data canonicalization (category), but don’t use that synonym because it’s too long) is more general: It means taking input (which may be in a number of different variation formats) and ensuring that it gets saved in only one standard/normal/canonical format/way.
(Never: Input massaging (category))
Escaping (category), Quoting (category), Encoding (category)?
I think in general I prefer Escaping (category). This generally involves putting an escape character or sequence (often ‘\’) in front of any characters that you want to not have their normal special significance in the target language/context. Sometimes, though, it involves replacing “dangerous” characters (those with special significance in the target language) with inert representations of them — as is the case with HTML encoding. The desired effect is to have these characters interpreted/displayed as the character/string literals themselves, rather than being interpreted as “special” by the target language.
I think the term Encoding (category) by itself is much too general and thus too ambiguous. But when we’re dealing specifically in the context of HTML, then the term HTML encoding (category) is appropriate, if not preferred.
The term Quoting (category) may be used sometimes… But I think that should be limited to the case/context where you are specifically talking about enclosing/wrapping a string with some kind of delimiter (typically a quotation mark—either ‘ or “). I (currently) don’t think it should be used think it should be used to describe other kinds of escaping.
Should Quoting (category) itself be considered a kind of escaping?? Perhaps… It does have a similar usage/effect: to inoculate/cause-to-be-inert/literal a string that would that would have otherwise had special meaning in the language. (Example: On the bash shell, $what! would have special significance, unless we quoted it like this: '$what!', causing it to turn into just an ordinary (inert) string.
It seems like all of these terms have to do with (scope/context) computer languages — especially with strings.
Console (category) or Command line (category) or Shell (category) or Terminal (category)?
Wow, that’s a tough one! I hear/see all of these options with great frequency, so I’d say they are all approximately equally valid. Perhaps some are more valid in certain situations though…
I’ll have to keep thinking on that.
I’m thinking that (Console (category) = Command line (category)) > Shell (category).
That is the shell is a more specific part/aspect/component of the command line (?). And it also refers to specific softwares such as bash and csh. Whereas “command line” refers to a broader category, of all things command-line based…
What does “console” even mean?
I think I will say that Terminal (category) is pretty much out of the running…
Console and command-line, however, you guys may continue to duke it out for a while longer…
} Software
{ Information / ontology
Kinds of problems
World problems (category), not Problems in the world (category)
Not sure: Organization (category) or Information organization (category)?
…
Not sure: Information problems (category) or Information organization problems (category)?
For now, I’m allowing usage of both of them, with the thought that they might actually be different… we’ll see.
Organizational problems (category), not Organization problems (category)
} Information / ontology
Higher education (category) or College education (category)?
I prefer College education (category), but it almost seems like more people refer to it as Higher education (category), so if I went with it, I might be a minority…
September 11, 2001 (category), not 9/11 (category), September 11 (category), 2001-09-11 (category), 11 September 2001 (category)
I would have called it 2001-09-11 (category), except I don’t think that is very user-friendly for most of my readers, and I wanted this particular article/topic to have a fairly broad/mainstream audience. If it were just for my geeky self, then that’s what I would have called it, but I can’t take the risk in this case that the name might turn people off from the topic. The topic is too important to let that happen.
The other obvious alternative was 9/11 (category), but I don’t like that name. It isn’t even obvious by looking at that title that it refers to a date. It’s ambiguous.
September 11, 2001 (category) was a compromise, plain and simple. I figured it would have pretty widespread recognizability and accessibility for most of my readers (even those British chaps who happen to visit ought to be able to figure it out).
Walla Walla University (category), not Walla Walla College (category)
WWU, not WWC
Interesting WWU news (category), not Interesting WWC news (category)
But…
Instances (category) or Examples (category)?
Instances (category) unless it’s juts begging to be called an Examples (category)
The world (category), not World (category)
Humans (category)(the species) or People (category)(more generally), but not Human beings (category), Humanity (category), Persons (category)
If you’re talking about what it means to be human (adjective), then yes, you can use Human (category).
The Constitution (category), not The constitution (category), Constitution (category), Our Constitution (category), US Constitution (category), American Constitution (category)
The Constitution (category) shall be the preferred term, and it shall refer to the Constitution of the United States of America. Specify the country only if it refers to a different country.
(the?) (U(nited?) S(tates?)?) (of?) (A(merica?))
The United States (category) or (rarely? ever? (too ambiguous)) America (category), not The United States of America (category), United States (category), United States of America (category), US (category), USA (category), U.S. (category), , U.S.A. (category), , The USA (category)
The U.S. invasion of Iraq (category), not The US invasion of Iraq (category), The United States invasion of Iraq (category), The United States’s invasion of Iraq (category), U.S. invasion of Iraq (category)
The world (category), not World (category)
Freedom (category), not Liberty (category), Right (category) (to something)
Exceptions:
- Religious liberty (category), because that is the prevailing term for it
Government (category), not The Government (category) or Political science (category), …
Church-State (category), not Church-state (category)
More specific: Religious liberty (category)
Law (category) or Legal (category)?
Law (category) makes a good category
Legal (category) makes a good adjective
Time is money (category), not Time costs money (category)
Money is power (category), not The influence of money (category), Money can be used to control (category)
Not: Money can buy anything (category), Everyone has a price (category) (sell-out price), …
Even though the statement “Money is power” is not necessarily always true, it still seems like the best name for the topic. It is true some of the time, and I’d like to collect in one place examples of when it is true.
Outdoors, not The outdoors
Mothers (category) or Motherhood (category)?
God / Religion / Spiritual / Christianity
< God (category)
Religion (category) < God (category)
So God (category) the topic is top-level (its primary category)… But God (category) in also a member of by Category:Religion, etc.
Is Spiritual life different from Spiritual?
Christian life or Spiritual life?
Spiritual (category), not Spirituality (category)
Anti-Semitism (category), not Anti-semitism (category), Antisemitism (category)
Also not include separate entries for inflected forms: Anti-Semitic (category).
Right-wing (category), not Right wing (category), Right-wing politics (category)
The – is because it is used adjectively, as in “this article is left-wing”, or “this has a left-wing bias”. Also because it is short for left-wing politics (which would have the -) — I just didn’t want to always have to remember/bother to spell it out each time.
Left-wing (category), not Left wing (category), Left-wing politics (category)
General: Abuse of power (category), specific: Governmental abuse (category)
Not: The United States government doing things it oughtn’t be doing (category) (too specific — am interested in abuses by other governments too!), Abuses by government (category), Governmental abuses (category)(plural) Government abuse (category)
Interpersonal relationships (category), not Relationships (category), Human relationships (category)
In cases when the context is clear (which is quite often), you’re free to just call it “relationships” when writing, etc. But when referring to the specific topic, be sure to specify Interpersonal relationships (category), as Relationships (category) on its own has a much more general/broad meaning to me…
“Nice” or “Good” or …?
Nice project web sites (category), not Good project web sites (category). I’m not sure why I prefer “nice” over “good” here, but it just sounds funny to me to call a site “good”….
Whether they should have articles (the, an) or not=
Prepositions
“from the terminal”, etc.
Context: [Command line (category)][GNU/Linux (category)]
- in the terminal
- from the terminal
- from the command line
- at the command line
- (occasionally — when you literally mean at the console itself, and not via SSH, etc.:) at the console
Not:
- on the terminal
- on the [anything]
In general
Not sure: Broadcasting (category), not Broadcast (category), Broadcasting media (category), Broadcast media (category)
Not unless you’re sure you mean it: Mass media (category), Mass communication (category)
The press (category) or The media (category)?
“The media” is preferred unless you are referring to the print media…
Print media (category) or Printed media (category)?
For now, I will prefer “Print media”.
Sounds sort of like “art” (ambiguous). But I actually want it to be in the context of The media.
[To do: See what Wikipedia uses]
type / kind
Usually I think I prefer “kind”.
String.kind_of?(Object)
Type/kind is a specific instance of: instances
Exception: Kinds of government (category), not Forms of government (category)
[Precedent (category)]:
duplication / repetition
- “duplication” refers to duplicated content
while “repetition” refers to duplicated actions/effort/work
“extension” or “plugin” or “add-on”?
Mozilla and MediaWiki prefer “extension”; Rails prefers “plugin”. We can use the project/locally preferred term on articles/categories specific to that software project.
But they’re really the same thing! So we need to decide on a single category to contain such articles/categories. (there are other kinds of add-ons besides the software kind; so this feels like a more general category than Extensions or Plugins).
- Subcategories:
- [[Category:Software / Extensions] (also member of)
- [[Category:Plugins] (seems relatively unambiguous without the “Software / ” context descriptor
(Scope: [MediaWiki (category)]) “article” or “page”?
Use “article” to avoid ambiguity or confusion, as this is the official MediaWiki name for such a page. “Page” is a more generic term. “Category page” (rather than category article) should be used to refer to… category pages.
(Scope: [databases (category)])
database or table?
A database contains related/relatable tables.
However, in the case of My databases, I call them “databases” to make them user-friendlier-sounding and less ambiguous (table has many other meanings), even though they’re technically just tables…
So, for front-facing content, I’ll probably use “database” to make it friendly-sounding, but for internal documentation or anywhere where the context can be assumed to be about databases, I will go ahead and use the technically correct term, whether table or database.
record or row ?
Row usually, although I actually prefer record.
field or column or property or attribute ?
column if it really is a database table we’re talking about.
If it’s a Ruby/ActiveRecord model, use attribute.
performance or speed?
“performance” sounds more professional. Sometimes can be ambiguous, but usually is not…
Customizable or personalizable?
category / tag / topic / keyword
- SourceForge/RubyForge uses “topic”
- Some sites have both categories and tags and make a distinction between them
subject or topic?
Domain or scope or context?
Scope seems more general, reusable, fewer-connotation-ful to me… So it would probably be my preference most of the time…
Domain can be useful at times too, though… The application can have an application domain (music, development tools, etc.). Subject areas in school can be considered “academic domains” (?)…
Field or discipline or area or subject or subject area?
Category:Academic disciplines
Math or mathematics?
Platform or environment?
Windows platform, GNU/Linux platform.
Ruby environment. IRb environment.
Mac or “Mac OS X” or “OS X”?
Come on, nobody uses Mac OS 9 any more… So specifying a version number at all seems redundant.
And just using a version number alone to refer to an operating system (“OS X”, “XP”)? That’s just plain silly!
I am going to assume that the next version of the Mac OS (OS XI??) is going to backwards compatible with OS X.
And therefore my conclusion is that we don’t need to specify a version number! The Macintosh OS is the Macintosh OS.
“__ system” or “__ software” or “__ tool”?
“normative” or “canonical” or “standard”?
normative — of, relating to, or determining norms or standards
“computing” or “computer” or “computers”?
“Computing standards”? “Computing problems”? There not problems with (physical) computers themselves but with the use of them…
web site or Web site or website?
I’ve caved in and starting lower-casing “web site”, but I have yet to stoop to one-wordizing it as “website”. I do have my limits.
Even though, it’s lower-case “web site”, Web when used on its own shall still be capitalized.
[Language], [Case] Web or web?
I think I’m finally starting to prefer the lowercase form, web, after years of stubbornly capitalizing “Web” everywhere!
FAQ or …
HTML or XHTML?
XHTML! Always. Unless of course you mean the older, deprecated non-XML-compliant standard that nobody ought to be using anymore…
issue or bug or problem?
“issue” seems more general (includes bugs as well as support requests? also includes enhancement/feature requests???)… And if you build a general “issue-tracking” system, then it certainly could be used for “bug-tracking”. > (more general than)
Not
Issue or problem?
- Normally: Problems
- Exceptions: Issue tracking
software developer or programmer or coder or software engineer or …?
“software developer” most of the time
See Software develoment / Titles
aspect or concern
Aspect-oriented programming
Software development concerns
top-level or top or root or base?
Usually, I’d say the root (?) of the tree.
Top-level node? Root node?
The name of the category that contains all others Category:/
religion or spirituality or spiritual life or theology?
publication or periodical or magazine or book or serial?
problems or challenges or balances?
Some of them are a bit more reluctant to go straight under “problems”. For example: Responsibility, Software problems, Balances, Control
aural (category) or oral (category) or audio (category)?
Probably aural for adjectival uses, and audio for noun uses…
Not sure: Mass communication (category) or Mass communications (category)?
To resolve [ambiguity (category)]
quote or quotation?
This is somewhat arbitrary but I will say…
http://webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=Quotation
something that is quoted; especially : a passage referred to, repeated, or adduced
“case (category)“
Use “letter case” when using the definition that is in the scope of Language
“In the case that…”
“Legal case”
“Number (category)“
Use “grammatical number” (?) when using the definition that is in the scope of Language
In the scope of math: …
Article metadata
English conventions edit (Category edit)
Shades of meaning edit (Category edit)
[–] Category:Shades of meaning
Style guide edit (Category edit)
See also: Ambiguity
Article Metadata: To do
Collect together on this page (automatically, by querying the DB) all aliases, ambiguities, etc. used on individual articles. That is, they may be “stored” on / “typed into” individual pages, but they should be listed here — the “master list”.