Tom, all,
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org> writes:
> > So there is a precedent for using “target” for this command.
>
> I wouldn't object to substituting "target" for "victim"; they're both
> pretty specific, and there's little risk of misunderstanding which
> database is meant. I don't know if that amounts to much of an
> advance in political correctness, though.
Based on my review of what 'dict' returns for each, 'target' is
distinctly more appropriate. Both definitions in WordNet for
'victim' refer to a 'person' and other dictionaries definitely
refer to 'person or living creature' more than not.
The definitions for 'target', on the other hand, more generally refer to
a goal or something which is being shot at and the references to
'person' in those definitions appears more in the vein of "covering all
bases" as it relates to 'person, place, or thing'.
> I'm less happy about substituting vaguer words like "subject".
> Particularly for non-native English speakers, that seems like it
> could be confusing --- eg, if you know the distinction between
> subject and object of a sentence, you might think it means the
> DB where the command is being issued.
Agreed.
Thanks!
Stephen