![]() |
|
Section names - Printable Version +- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja) +-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html) +--- Forum: Voynich Talk (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-6.html) +--- Thread: Section names (/thread-1099.html) |
Section names - Koen G - 16-11-2016 (Consider this thread as a bit of a brainstorming space.) I have noticed that there are some problems with the way we refer to certain sections. There seems to be a tension between sticking to older names like "biological section" on the one hand, and moving towards more neutral terminology on the other. I have given this some thought, and, in my opinion, these are the pros and cons: Old names: pros
Let one thing be clear - and I put this in bold - we cannot and should not require people to change the terminology they like to use! But, I also sense that a number of people (myself included) would like a more neutral, standard set of terms to refer to certain sections. If we could agree on these, I would happily use them. They could for example be called "forum standard". The idea would not be that everybody should use them, but rather that is clearly understood what is meant when somebody uses these terms. We could of course also define a "traditional standard", basically listing the traditional name alongside a more neutral one. Before proposing any particular terms or details, I would first like to hear your opinion on this matter. RE: Section names - VViews - 16-11-2016 RE: Section names - Koen G - 16-11-2016 RE: Section names - VViews - 16-11-2016 RE: Section names - Koen G - 16-11-2016 RE: Section names - VViews - 16-11-2016 RE: Section names - Koen G - 16-11-2016 RE: Section names - VViews - 16-11-2016 RE: Section names - Koen G - 16-11-2016 RE: Section names - -JKP- - 17-11-2016 |