SUO: Re: On The Supremely Superfluous Type Of The Iceberg
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Matthew West wrote:
1.
> Dear John,
>
> I also think entity is probably the best choice.
> In EPISTLE we use thing because entity is a reserved word
> in the EXPRESS language (meaning entity type) so we had to
> use something else.
>
> But I'm not precious about names, provided the usage is defined.
> Although I prefer not to use terms that have a somewhat different
> popular meaning than that which is defined.
2.
> Dear Phil,
>
> I don't know what principles other people here have for naming things.
> Our approach is to name things based on their underlying nature as far
> as possible. The suggestion of referent seems to define something in
> terms of an important property. So I would not be keen.
John, Matthew, Phil, & All --
After carefully reviewing all of the suggestions,
hierarchical, hyphenated, hypnotic, and otherwise,
I have come to the unilaterally unanimous decision
that "logiferous ether" would just about summit up.
I suggest that we put it to a vote, straw or else.
Isn't it how M&M market-tested special relativity?
Jon Awbrey
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤