On 20/09/18 15:12, Paul Wouters wrote: > Joking aside, Niels does bring a valid point, and it would be nice if we > got some guidelines for avoiding these existing known words, and prevent > us from creating new problematic ones. I'd be fine if someone wrote a draft that provided examples of terms that are generally better avoided and guidance as to how to do better with a focus perhaps on trying to find accurate but descriptive terms. That could be fairly tricky to get right and I'd guess contentious, but I don't see it being a problem that someone wants to work on that. I'd read it anyway. I'm not sure if it'd help or hinder such work, but I'd be happy if such a draft included guidance on not using marketing terms myself, like simple-foo, trusted-foo, cloud-foo and especially cyber-foo. (I get very slightly offended sometimes when people do that;-) If including such helped, the putative draft could then be about doing better than badly chosen terms, and not only about terms that may be considered offensive for historic or other non-technical reasons. S.
Attachment:
0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
