It’s time to move on from these regressive terms. They aren’t properly descriptive anyway. More from CDM:
I know it’s easy to resist change. So let me explain why I think this one is especially a no-brainer – something that could be done immediately. The fact that it triggers debate is to say, then we are taking some critical terms and evaluating exactly what they mean. Any process that does that improves the language, and whatever improves the language also makes us more effective at communicating the technology. So any debate this may trigger is far from pointless – on the contrary, it proves that language matters.
Likely replacements: Main/secondary is likely the default technical replacement we need, for the simple reason that they start with the same initial letter. That means abbreviations on spec sheets and schematics, already abbreviated M and S, don’t need to be changed. And it’s still clear and generic, especially fitting cases (as with database primary/secondary) where what’s emphasized is just prioritization, not necessarily hierarchical or controller relationships/
No comments:
Post a Comment