Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 11:07:55 -0800
From: alex@foogod.com
To: idalton@ferret.phonewave.net
Cc: List User <lists@chaven.com>, Alan Chandler <alan@chandlerfamily.org.uk>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: spelling of disc (disk) in /devfs
Message-ID: <20010201110755.B19961@draco.foogod.com>
In-Reply-To: <6lah7t4f685qo3igk679ocdo2obfhd9lvg@4ax.com> <030301c08be6$e494f480$160912ac@stcostlnds2zxj> <20010201102748.B6959@ferret.phonewave.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <20010201102748.B6959@ferret.phonewave.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 10:27:48AM -0800, idalton@ferret.phonewave.net wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 06:35:30PM -0600, List User wrote:
> > If it's any consolation from (this American) I'm glad it's 'disc' (always
> > thought that 'disk' was just for those marketing dweebs who couldn't spell
> > right
> > in the first place).
> 
> And in terms of casual usage, I've nearly always used 'disk' in
> reference to media that can be mounted read-write, and 'disc' to media
> that can only be mounted read-only.

This seems like a pretty arbitrary distinction, really, but:

> More technically, 'disc' is a single media layer (usually a CD-ROM) and
> 'disk' is a removable media device with a protective casing.

This is closer to making some logical sense, but you have to be careful about 
your terms:  DVDs, for example, can have up to four media layers on one disc.

As a genuine anglophile, I have a good sympathy for the expressed preferences 
toward more british spellings (I have been known from time to time to put "u"s 
in words my american comerades did not approve of), however I have always 
considered "disk" to be a technical term, much as "byte", with a reasonably 
well defined meaning and spelling, outside of any particular variant of the 
english language.

In particular, a "disk" is a rotating digital recording medium used by 
computers.  A "disc" is a flat, round object.  CDs and DVDs, therefore, are 
disks which also happen to be discs, but one describes their function, and the 
other describes their shape.  Floppies, on the other hand, are disks, but are 
arguably not discs (they're rectangular.  They may have discs buried inside 
them, but that's not what people generally refer to when they refer to 
floppies)

I think this distinction becomes particularly important when one gets into 
non-removable media such as hard drives.  These drives are "disks" which 
contain several "discs" inside them (several platters).  When one refers to a 
hard disk, one is referring to the whole assembly, not to just one disc 
(platter).

In any case, all of that having been said, I do think this is a rather trivial 
thing to be arguing about, and personally I can live with it either way.  The 
one thing I would like to point out is that "disk" is the standard industry 
convention, and thus if anything I think it should have more weight behind it 
solely because of that (it's good to be consistent with what everybody else in 
the industry is doing, even if it is something as minor as spelling of terms.)

-alex
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/