I'm reminded of my quest for the plural of "status". -us being a Latin singular suffix... There ought to be a plural out there besides "statuses", which may be technically correct but gives no hint about the character of a status. Not like a "murder" of crows does.
I think it sort of branches out in three directions:
- state (all statuses at a single moment)
- gamut (a range of possible (mutually exclusive?) statuses)
- story (all statuses for a single object)
I'm not sure what's the use of such thoughts, but my mind enjoys thinking them: words as elements in a topological space.
I suppose it's handy for naming variables, but my coworkers don't typically like the names I come up with. I had a dict mapping strings to size-limited deques containing timestamps the other day which I called an AmnesicChronology. Didn't survive review.
Wouldn't that I ply all the statuses over time for something, but not necessarily a slice of those statuses? Like if we're taking about the plural of continent, we're looking for "continents", not necessarily "world", right ?
For some reason, creating such collections is joyful. And reading through them too. A glossary, of which kind ever, is an unofficially stable state. That's a toolkit onto which people can base their unsharp experiments with their language. I am just creating such a thing too, while translating a documentation. I often come back to it.
However, I have to say that these words should be sorted after the entity they describe. As it is now, it is difficult to find a good word. Agreed, this is not a simple task to do.
"Naming things needn't be hard" is not a good way to start a project intended to help people name things, because naming things is always hard. It's especially not a good start if the project is just a list of grouped words with no commentary on the process of naming things.
While the site is neat, the headline reads like a total failure to me.
It looks like it's the GOVUK Frontend JS. Most of it is probably not necessary.
That being said, the site feels instantaneous to me, and scores 95/100 on PageSpeed Insights, with the only oversight being the render-blocking Google font which adds 750ms to initial render, but should be cached on subsequent navigations. Perhaps your browser isn't caching it, which would explain the sluggishness.
200kB of JavaScript (50kB gzipped) is pretty lean for modern websites. React.js on its own is around 130kB, for just the library.
This site links to Wordnik, which is a great site, but lately I've been using WordHippo to find similar words or narrow in on a word that better fits what I'm describing. The way it groups by meaning is much more convenient. Rhymezone (which does more than rhymes) was my favorite prior to finding WordHippo.
My feel for the words is that any ontology which uses a tree to organize its names and defines no relationships between those objects is a taxonomy, but some ontologies do more.
I'm leaning towards ontology here because inferior and superior are not presented as mere subtaxa of the genus "ferior", but as opposites. I don't think taxonomy does opposites.
What a pointless website. Basically suggesting people shoehorn their class names into a fixed list.
Much of the website goes into pedantic levels of obscurity, e.g. undecuple most people would have to look that up and its prone to mis-spelling.
Other parts of the website are naïvely over-simplified. For example an animal apparently only has a head, foot and tail.
Sadly the website reads similarly to journalists who write articles in the company of a thesaurus, thinking they can sound smart just by looking up an alternative more obscure option in the thesaurus.
