[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Version" Aversion
- To: <bobp>, <marcs>, <xanatech>
- Subject: Re: "Version" Aversion
- From: Michael McClary <michael>
- Date: Wed, 13 Dec 89 16:35:30 PST
- Cc: <joel>
> From marcs Tue Dec 12 11:27:15 1989
> ... Teledyne Brown ...
> used the terms "version" and "variation". They use the term
> "version" to refer to the sequential series of similar documents
> all attempting to achieve the same purpose. They use the term
> "variation" the way you used "branch" and "prong", i.e., a spin-off.
> You will find this terminology in use in the menus in the Capabilities
> Review tomorrow, though there is one thing I do not like about it:
> the term "version" is overloaded, in that people normally think of
> versions as meaning both versions and variations. What we desperately
> need is another term for sequential versions so that the term "version"
> can be reserved for meaning the aggregate of both.
> A year ago, when we were writing the FEBE 88.1 document, dean and I
> fought over this for several hours, and in the end he persuaded me
> that, at least for the FEBE document, "version" and "variation" were
> not the best choice. In that document, we used "parallel version" and
> "sequential version".
Railroad (or possibly highway) routing terminology might have a set
of terms that would be clear, and would not conflict with existing
Any railfans on staff? (If not, I could call up my brother...)