Shared language

Shared language is not consistency of wording. It is one meaning for each term, held wherever that term appears in the work.

A term carries one meaning across the specification, the code, and the interface. Two meanings for one term is a violation. Nearness of the two meanings makes no difference. Two definitions that overlap are still two definitions, and the term names a different set on each side of the overlap.

Every term the work stipulates is defined in the standing instruction file the model reads every session. The location of the definition is itself a rule. A definition that exists only in prose is a violation. A definition that lives in a document nobody loads is a violation.

Each stipulated term resolves to a single definition, and that definition sits in the file that gets loaded. Three conditions fail it: a term used in the interface with a meaning the specification does not carry, a term defined in the specification and used in the code with a wider meaning, and a term in constant use that nothing defines anywhere.

Overdue means past its due date and not fully paid. Unpaid covers invoices that are not yet due as well. The two words name different sets, so they are two terms with two definitions. Using one where the other is defined is a violation.

Inspection

Trace how our own terms get defined — where the definitions live, what links to them, and which terms we lean on constantly and never defined anywhere.

Held this, or broke it? Say which principle and what happened — tell me at /contact, subject Principles. What moves a band is somebody else's experience, and I'll publish what moved and who moved it.