Scratchpad for resolving naming issues

[KC]

i've always called 'Derek's Bowline' as a version of B.O.B.; and a Round Turn Bowline as a double, if maid with yosemite tie off a DBY.  Water Bowline to me is with a Clove Hitch instead of Round Turn.  Round Turn gives softer bend to Standing Part than Single Bowline.  Water Bowline gives same bend to Standing Part as Single.

i think a Bowline is a Sheet Bend to self, to form eye.  i like classifications by mechanics; that includes direction of initiating force pull.  Calling a Crossed Turn as Bitters over Standing Part, but same arraingemeant pulled by other leg, so that now the Standing Part traps Bitters is a Hitch.

i find the common description of a Clove as 2 half hitches etc. lacking, as it should be a Crossed Turn, followed by a Hitch by these descriptions; A Cow/Larks ;same except for a reversal of 1 end.

It is a great mess we have been handed, but then agian that part of it reflects history and culture that we should not totally sterilize out of it perhaps?

[Dan_Lehman]

I'm not confused by the generally-used terminology.
...
There is nothing so salutary as viewing the world as it really is.  We are a mere handful of knot nerds in a world with long-established and widely-used knot names when it comes to common or simple knots.

You can't really be THIS blind, can you?
That the common knots have varied & confused names--names that apply to more
than one knot, and knots with more than one name applied to them, and discernable
qualifier/adjectival names (e.g., "double", "bend", "twin") names used in conflicting
senses, is a serious detriment to communication among knot users (not (just) knot "nerds").
Within some small knot sets one can live with certain inconsistencies, and others
won't show up for want of comparison.  But "to promote the study of knots, ...", etc.,
a better means of communication & knot identification will be greatly helpful
(because otherwise one must give a lengthy dose of context/explanation for the
so-called common name of choice).

... standard names ... people calling knots the wrong names

What is this great standard by which you assess correctness of knot names?
Do you have separate standards for application areas--arborist, caver, climber,
sailor, fisherperson, construction worker, utility-line hauler, SAR workers, ...
in which region of the country, or world?

I'm not discounting the problem of spitting into the wind (fighting common
(mis-)naming),
but with the nomenclature as confused/conflicting as it is, there's also trouble
trying to stay within it.  (I argued with RescueMan over his insistence to make
"Fisherman's Bend" be the "bend"--Ashley's def.--rather than F.Knot, as has
been the case historically, given the entrenched usage AND the lack of historical
basis for "bend" meaning what Ashley wanted.  But I share his desire for functional
naming (class names); this of course confronts the peculiar naming of anglers, i.p.!)

I don't think you'd fancy your toolbox names so much if in the bolt case "hex"
meant 6-sided but for the wrench it (surprise!) meant 6 or 8 or maybe just square,
and sometimes just "bad luck".

--dl*
====

[DerekSmith]

I won't be joining you.  Do you have any idea how many times that is identified as a Bowline on a bight in literature and in a universal way?

Do you have any idea how many times Hydrochloric acid was refered to as 'Spirits of Salt' or 'Pickle liquor'?  But today the only place you will see these terms being used is in lectures on the history of chemistry.

IF it is worth doing, then this is the only group that can do it, and then it will take a considerable amount of time for the rationalised system to be rolled out and adopted - it may even take a generation to pass (or pass away)  before it becomes defacto - but the change can never begin  until the rationalisation is made.

[roo]

Do you have any idea how many times Hydrochloric acid was refered to as 'Spirits of Salt' or 'Pickle liquor'?  But today the only place you will see these terms being used is in lectures on the history of chemistry.

.

Was "Spirit of Salt" or "Pickle Liquor" ever the universal name?  Bowline on a bight, however confusing or unsystematic you think it may be, is the universally accepted and long-established name.

[roo]

You can't really be THIS blind, can you?
That the common knots have varied & confused names--names that apply to more
than one knot, and knots with more than one name applied to them, and discernable
qualifier/adjectival names (e.g., "double", "bend", "twin") names used in conflicting
senses, is a serious detriment to communication among knot users (not (just) knot "nerds").

You can do what you wish, but this simply has not been such a great difficulty.  The biggest "problem" that occurs is that people who are intent on arguing or "being right" chase this issue for no real benefit.  Are you assuming that if you push one name over another, that people will stop using alternate terms?  That millions of books will vanish?  Won't happen.

What is this great standard by which you assess correctness of knot names?

The Ashley Book of Knots is one, but so is common parlance and English dictionaries.  Other knot books or reference material have introduced names to other more obscure knots.

A resolution or decree on an IGKT forum is likely to have much less impact than any of the sources listed above.

[Dan_Lehman]

Are you assuming that if you push one name over another, that people will stop using alternate terms?  That millions of books will vanish?  

Of course not.  But I'm also realizing that those books have only a limited effect
over the long haul (or even short one), and that authors can be influenced.
If the IGKT (or whoever) can come up with some good guidance on naming
(if only to kill some of the bigger blunders), AND present it to some of the bodies
deemed reasonably authoritative in their fields (UIAA, BMC, Nat.Spel.Soc., e.g.),
and certain authors, considerable influence can be gained.  (Oh, and Scouts.)

The Ashley Book of Knots is one, but so is common parlance and English dictionaries.  Other knot books or reference material have introduced names to other more obscure knots.

And, as has been noted repeatedly, these do NOT a unified, consistent reference make!

A resolution or decree on an IGKT forum is likely to have much less impact than any of the sources listed above.

No one thinks that our course will be to issue a statement to the world, and
"World, Heed This!".

--dl*
====