JoeRuelle on Nostr: I think your argument is by far the strongest for what we have now (neutral ...

I think your argument is by far the strongest for what we have now (neutral labelling, flexibility, wide berth, better of a petri dish for new ideas...). The biggest issue for me is that this more ambiguous approach pushes too much of the cognitive load over to users. Many of these benefits accrue to the devs directly and to the users in a roundabout way. Better the opposite I think, have the benefits accrue to the users directly and to the devs in a roundabout way.

Also while I agree devs are motivated to work through the inconsistent UX, it becomes hard to channel that motivation to concrete action. You have 3 clients doing it one way, 3 clients doing it another way, and 3 clients yet another way. All 9 are hearing complaints from users and feeling motivated to work things out, but work things out how? Often it becomes a very tense and drawn-out game of paper scissors rock.

I think a lot of this falls into the class of problems for which no later decision can make up for the absence of an earlier decision. And lexicons do force those decisions much earlier.