44 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
44 lines
1.7 KiB
Markdown
# 2025-12-17 12:32:??
|
|
|
|
#topic/ambiguity
|
|
|
|
A while ago I heard a minor coding influencer lament
|
|
that frameworks, packages, and tools
|
|
often have ridiculous sounding names[^2]
|
|
when, he suggests, they ought to just be called what they do.
|
|
|
|
[^2]: `bubble-tea` and `ratatui`
|
|
(libraries for creating CLI's) come to my mind
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately some people and organizations agree with him,
|
|
giving us terms which mean both something very general
|
|
and something very specific.[^3]
|
|
|
|
[^3]: [[project-management-tm|"Project Management"]]
|
|
was my go to example, but weak
|
|
because it's difficult for me to articulate
|
|
the difference from construction project management
|
|
especially to someone unfamiliar with the specifics of either.
|
|
|
|
For lack of a better term I've been thinking of this as an SEO problem,
|
|
but the bigger problem is that it invites [[ambiguity#Category Mistake|Category Mistake]],
|
|
whereby the ignorant listener associates traits unique to the example
|
|
to all things that the name could describe.
|
|
|
|
I thought to finally write about this problem
|
|
while researching [[lighting-controls#Protocols|lighting control protocols]].
|
|
The two most dominant examples:
|
|
|
|
* [[lighting-controls#^dali|"Digital Addressable Lighting Interface (DALI)"]]
|
|
* [[lighting-controls#^dmx|"Digital Multiplex (DMX)"]]
|
|
|
|
while notably different in topology,
|
|
could both be described accurately with the other's name.
|
|
|
|
> It is possible to avoid this problem
|
|
> without the effort necessary to come up with a clever name.
|
|
> Just stick an arbitrary, but reasonably unique word
|
|
> in front of the generic description.
|
|
> A person's name ("John's Digital Addressable Lighting Interface (JDALI)")
|
|
> or your favorite animal ("Heron Digital Multiplex (HDMX)") are good options.
|