{domain:"www.qualitydigest.com",server:"169.47.211.87"} Skip to main content

User account menu
Main navigation
  • Topics
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Videos/Webinars
    • All videos
    • Product Demos
    • Webinars
  • Advertise
    • Advertise
    • Submit B2B Press Release
    • Write for us
  • Metrology Hub
  • Training
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
Mobile Menu
  • Home
  • Topics
    • 3D Metrology-CMSC
    • Customer Care
    • FDA Compliance
    • Healthcare
    • Innovation
    • Lean
    • Management
    • Metrology
    • Operations
    • Risk Management
    • Six Sigma
    • Standards
    • Statistics
    • Supply Chain
    • Sustainability
    • Training
  • Login / Subscribe
  • More...
    • All Features
    • All News
    • All Videos
    • Contact
    • Training

Generically Specific: An Oxymoron?

What’s in a name? Naming conventions need to make sense to the operators

Jude Holmes
Tue, 02/07/2012 - 08:47
  • Comment
  • RSS

Social Sharing block

  • Print
Body

I recently went to the movie Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, starring an incredible new young actor named Thomas Horn, along with Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock. There is a scene in the movie when Oskar (Horn) and his dad (Hanks) are having an oxymoron war, saying things like “deafening silence” and “clearly confused” and “seriously funny,” and—one of my favorites—“jumbo shrimp.”

ADVERTISEMENT

This scene actually reminded me of an oxymoron I’ve heard used in our ProFicient SPC Fundamentals training class: “generically specific.” Students used it in reference to naming conventions within the software.

Here is the situation: I am creating a new data entry configuration (DEC) for collecting dimensional data. The parts I’m currently working with require inside diameter (ID) and outside diameter (OD) measurements. So I should call this DEC “diameters,” right? What if I had other parts that required ID, OD, and overall length (OAL), and I used the same equipment to measure those parts? In that case, I wouldn’t want to name the DEC  “diameters” because it’s a little too generic.

 …

Want to continue?
Log in or create a FREE account.
Enter your username or email address
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
By logging in you agree to receive communication from Quality Digest. Privacy Policy.
Create a FREE account
Forgot My Password

Add new comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Please login to comment.
      

© 2025 Quality Digest. Copyright on content held by Quality Digest or by individual authors. Contact Quality Digest for reprint information.
“Quality Digest" is a trademark owned by Quality Circle Institute Inc.

footer
  • Home
  • Print QD: 1995-2008
  • Print QD: 2008-2009
  • Videos
  • Privacy Policy
  • Write for us
footer second menu
  • Subscribe to Quality Digest
  • About Us
  • Contact Us