[OSM-talk] Drain socks

stevea steveaOSM at softworkers.com
Fri Mar 19 09:33:04 UTC 2021

Speaking personally and as mapper and user of OSM, I have a preference for precise over common.  Without being insulting, I don't think OSM wants to map for users who are ignorant of precision, simply because we wish them to (already) understand the word they are using:  this promulgates a lack of precision in our map, which can't be a good thing.  I might be unusual, but I enjoy learning something new (when mapping, when doing many activities), especially when and where the (newer) word is more precise rather than simply my commonplace understanding of it.

I do appreciate that this might make difficult the interpretation of such a word into other languages, but a word as a stand-in for a concept should be translatable.  When it isn't, we have cognates, and those are perfectly suitable.  (I have noticed Francophones especially tend to dislike directly Anglophone cognates, instead coining their own word, one that is "more French").

"Fluid" is ideal, in my opinion.  As a native English speaker, it is both broad enough to encompass gasses as well as precise enough to include liquids (and gasses).  Liquid, while it is more common in English (not by much), is not as flexible a word and is imprecise (distinctly wrong) for gasses.  And as pipes carry both, we should prefer fluid over liquid.

> On Mar 19, 2021, at 12:16 AM, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
> The common use of the word 'fluid' only includes liquids. 
> Not everyone is a scientist. Even worse is the job of interpreting this into other languages. 
> So, yes .. avoid the use of the word 'fluids'. 

More information about the talk mailing list