'add' Page NOT Screen vs Page vs Card!!

[j]

> What name calling?  I didn't say he was elitist, merely that people who
> frown on someone else's tool because it uses words like "card" etc. are
> elitist.

To be honest, I did use the word first when referring to a line in one 
of Dar Scott's posts to the list.  I said a statement "smacked of 
elitism."  I also mentioned my hope that I was misreading the intent of 
the sentence.  I am still hoping that was the case, and it seems 
possible.

My concerns are essentially these:

(a) Adding levels of complexity to the Transcript language and to all 
resulting discussions regarding the language should be avoided unless 
absolutely necessary.  The more synonyms one has for the same object, 
the more complex the learning curve for new users.  One of our goals as 
a community should be turning on as many people to xTalk languages as 
possible.  People need empowerment, lest the M$s of the world rule us 
all (metaphorically and perhaps literally).

(b) There seems to be misunderstanding of the card-stack metaphor and 
the reasoning behind the use of the card-stack metaphor.  Cards in a 
stack can be reordered (just try Transcript's "sort" command).  The 
only way you are reordering the pages in a book is to tear them all out 
first, and last I checked, that's not a book anymore—it's a stack!  :)

(c) In the past, xCards have been slighted by many "real" programmers.  
If one avoids using jargon like "card" to assist his users, more power 
to him and I applaud him for his effort to meet the needs of his 
audience.  If one avoids such terms to distance herself from the xCard 
legacy and avoid some associated stigma (real or imagined), then for 
shame; be proud of who you are and of the way you code.

(d) Depending on implementation, synonyms can slow the interpreter.  As 
I understand it, this would not be a concern with the Rev/MC engine.

J.