Re: It did happen on a Friday...

Subject: Re: It did happen on a Friday...
From: eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com
To: Al Geist <al -dot- geist -at- geistassociates -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:17:16 -0500

Al Geist <al -dot- geist -at- geistassociates -dot- com> wrote on 02/24/2004 10:44:10 AM:
> I like Diane's suggestion of "primary" and "secondary."

But that suggestion is/may be incorrect. Unless the master is determined
at start-up and if the master is lost, a new master is selected. Then
perhaps a slave could be referred to as a secondary. But even then,
secondary suggests some autonomy or decision making capability and does
not implicate the total subservience usually required by a slave. In my
experience, a secondary device has usually referred to a redundant device
that is used only in the event the primary fails.

Seeing as master and slave are both perfectly reasonable words and have
various acceptable uses (regardless of whether the act they are describing
is acceptable or not), it seems pointless to confuse readers who should be
able to recognise and distinguish technical nomenclature from support of
kidnapping/indenturing human workers.

And as far as other leader/follower analogies, I think some people are a
little too sensitive. If it's being used in the context of reflecting the
structure why is it offensive? Why is Chief/Indian more offensive than
Captain/Private or Officer/Soldier or Manager/Worker or Coach/Player or

Next thing you know we'll be having trouble with words like niggardly. :P

Eric L. Dunn
Senior Technical Writer

Previous by Author: RE: To XML or to UI
Next by Author: RE: It did happen on a Friday...
Previous by Thread: RE: It did happen on a Friday...
Next by Thread: Re: It did happen on a Friday...

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads