RE: Replacing "master" and "slave" terminology

Subject: RE: Replacing "master" and "slave" terminology
From: "Lauren" <lauren -at- writeco -dot- net>
To: "'Abels, Marci A [NTK]'" <Mercedes -dot- A -dot- Abels -at- sprint -dot- com>, <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:52:20 -0700

> From: Abels, Marci A [NTK]

> I agree that master/slave is a good description, but, as
> pointed out here already, it will get in the way of good
> communication for some of the audience.

Wait. Why would the terms "master" and "slave" get in the way of good
communication? That is what the components are called and there are not
better terms for describing the relationship. The master cylinder in my car
controls when the slave cylinders function. The master cannot function
without its slaves and slaves cannot function without their masters. At
least in my car's braking system and in other components that use these

Using other terms would lead to confusion. If you went into an auto parts
store and said that you needed a pair "contributor cylinders," nobody would
know what you wanted.

> I have used
> manager/contributor to describe this relationship.

Manager/contributor would not provide an effective description of the brake
components. The master is not a manager because it does not function
independently of slaves or the driver of the vehicle, who would technically
be a manager. A slave is not a contributor because it has no function
outside of the master/slave relationship. A contributor to the braking
system would be the wheels and other components that affect braking.

Even the master and slave components of a BUS link system cannot be
effectively described without the terms "master" and "slave." The master is
controlled by the user, ultimately, and the master controls the slaves.
There is only one master and there can be several slaves. Slaves have no
function outside of their function with the master.

What other words can possibly describe this relationship? Perhaps we lack
synonyms because our society lacks relationships like these. As I stated in
a previous post, "master" can be replaced with "boss," but there is not
another term for "slave." From what I've seen, when "boss" is used, then it
_bosses_ another component with a component name. Like, "anchor the boss
component to the tag." ( The
tag is the component being bossed.



Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.

True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity!

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit

To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Re: Replacing "master" and "slave" terminology: From: Abels, Marci A [NTK]

Previous by Author: RE: Microsoft Word - Enlish and French dictionaries in the samedocument
Next by Author: RE: Tool to clean up MS Word (2003)
Previous by Thread: Re: Replacing "master" and "slave" terminology
Next by Thread: Re: Replacing "master" and "slave" terminology

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

Sponsored Ads