This is how I understand the mapping of terms: WC-1 language WC-NG language -------------------------------------------------------------------- "the working version" ACTUAL_NODE -------------------------------------------------------------------- "the base" WORKING_NODE if present, else BASE_NODE "the pristine version" -------------------------------------------------------------------- "the revert-base" BASE_NODE (when BASE_NODE differs from WORKING_NODE) "the base" (when BASE_NODE same as WORKING_NODE) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you think it's time to bite the bullet and rename at least "WORKING_NODE" to "RESTRUCTURED_NODE", as discussed before? I think that would help to alleviate some sources of confusion. (One could make an argument for changing "BASE_NODE" too, but I think it is quite a good name despite the WC-1 "base" terminology not always matching it.) - Julian
