Re: terminology question

>It is generally not a good idea to redefine terms, even if the
>original definition is somehow wrong.  Having two incompatible
>definitions of 'variant' around can only lead to confusion.  If you
>have some interesting concept you want to define a term for, there are
>plenty of other, uncontaminated, words you could pick.

I agree.  From the Merriam Webster online dictionary:

    variant

    noun
    Date: 1848

    : one of two or more persons or things exhibiting
    usually slight differences: as a : one that exhibits
    variation from a type or norm b : one of two or
    more different spellings (as labor and labour) or
    pronunciations (as of economics \ek-, Ek-\) of the
    same word c : one of two or more words (as
    geographic and geographical) or word elements
    (as mon- and mono-) of essentially the same
    meaning differing only in the presence or absence
    of an affix 

It makes absolutely no sense whasoever to use the term variant to
describe a singleton representation.  The HTTP spec does so because
somebody wanted a shortcut and didn't like the word "representation".
The HTTP spec only needs to be self-consistent, so this is not a
technical error -- it is just confusing.  I refuse to allow that confusion
to propagate into anything else I write about the Web, including e-mail.

....Roy