Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > We also say that we will "show the full path names" in that > documentation. The primary issue is not the presence of "name" there, but the lack of "path" in the word chosen. Many things can have "name" (including "object name"), and "path", not "name", in "path name" is what clarifies what kind of name it is. Given that --format placeholders include "objectname", it does not make a good design to use "name" alone without saying what kind of "name" it is. Calling it "pathname", not just "path", is perfectly OK. But if there is no other things the word "path" could refer to in this context, which I think is the case here, "path" would be acceptable.
