> it does not match my understanding of how standards bodies work However they work, they don't seem to produce a leading answer to a leading question.
Before posting my appeal, I googled variants of "ISO computer terminology". I got the impression there were over 30 ISO committees dealing with aspects of this topic, including the vexed one of translating computer manuals. I gave up and asked this forum if anyone could recommend the leading (ISO) source of common terms, like: platform, program, etc. (…hey! – I've just reduxed my original post.) It seems nobody can. I might as well have asked the Freemasons their meaning of "secret society". > that does not match my understanding of how language use works What hope is there of dialog with someone if you don't agree on basic terms? That's my understanding of how language use works. Or doesn't. Yet here I am, setting out (…yet again) to talk to non-J initiates about J – and I want to use words which I know they'll understand, like: variable, constant, function – and I want to avoid words like noun, verb, pronoun, proverb – because that's all J mystery jargon. Don't I need a touchstone of definitions my reader and I will agree on? To-date I've come up with these candidates: (a) The Oxford Dictionary (…nowadays better than I expected it to be, going by past experience) (b) The following site: http://techterms.com …which is cool. Just what I was looking for. But lacks the authority of an ISO standard. Also (…oh no!) I look up a word like: Constant –and I don't agree with what it says… https://techterms.com/definition/constant In the final para it seems to be describing #define, not: const (…if you know any C/C++). Plus no mention of IMHO the chief role of a "constant": to behave programatically like a variable but preclude reassignment. Thus scotching the perennial C/C++ bug: if (myconst = x) { … } Also, on the home page, "Today's Quiz Question" is garbled… not a good sign for something purporting to be authoritative. Can anyone do better? …there, now I've described exactly what I'm looking for. On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 6:27 PM, Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > I do not think that "common usage" depends on ISO standards. > > Or, at least, that does not match my understanding of how language use > works (and, for that matter, it does not match my understanding of how > standards bodies work). > > Thanks, > > -- > Raul > > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Ian Clark <earthspo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Sorry, Joe, I want "common programmer terms" for "platform, program, > etc", > > i.e. terms common to all programmers, not just J-ers. > > > > Especially not J-ers! > > > > I tried looking up some of these terms in the Oxford Dictionary of > English > > (courtesy Apple) and I'm impressed. It seems it has authoritative but > > straightforward meanings under the subheading "Computing" for all I've > tried > > . > > > > But I'm still hoping to hear what ISO standard people on this list use, > or > > some standards body. I'm taking the baffled silence to mean that nobody > has > > ever used such a list. The fabled precision of IT professionals doesn't > > extend to terminology, it seems. > > > > Such lists exist. I've seen them – though only in German, and that was > > decades ago. Documenters need them for the purpose of translating > manuals. > > Though maybe the whole thing is still woolly, like it was in my day. An > > Arab once told me he always used the English manual because he couldn't > > make head or tail of the Arabic one. > > > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:57 PM, Joe Bogner <joebog...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I went back and looked at some of the existing material > >> > >> This seems to be a good list of definitions with examples: > >> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/primer/contents.htm > >> > >> This text seems devoid of too many terms: > >> http://www.jsoftware.com/books/pdf/easyj.pdf > >> > >> Of course, I'm not reading these with "beginner eyes" so both may still > >> need to be unpacked more > >> > >> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Ian Clark <earthspo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > It's absurdly difficult to write a good "first-contact" text for J > >> without > >> > reference to a single accepted source of definitions like: platform, > >> > program, app, script, variable, constant, function, array, string, > >> > character, number … > >> > > >> > Is there an ISO standard for common programmer terms (in English)? > >> > > >> > If the answer is: legion (…my first impression) – then is there one > that > >> > stands out for you? > >> > > >> > I have an operational need for a weblink to a good clear published > free > >> > authoritative text. To avoid cluttering this thread, please don't > offer > >> > your own definitions of the above terms here (although of course I'd > be > >> > frightfully interested to hear them one day.) > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > >> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/ > forums.htm > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
