Rename M3 Metamodel to Language?

[enikao]

We were also going to rename Metamodel → Language, right?

Originally posted by @dslmeinte in #77 (comment)

[enikao]

That's one option.
Another thought: If we separated Language Registry from Storage (as per current discussion in reference architecture group), we might have both:

• Metamodel is a regular node in Storage (akin to MPS structure aspect)
• Language is a deployed language (akin to MPS SLanguage)

[enikao]

Just regarding the name:

Pro Metamodel:

• More commonly used term, e.g. in M3 model

Pro Language:

• Relates to "Language Integration on the Web" name

[dslmeinte]

Argument for Language: Metamodel has a name which is not relevant for the metamodel of a language - only for the language itself.

[ftomassetti]

I am fine with both, but my preference would be for Metamodel, as I think of Language as Metamodel + notation

[dslmeinte]

In a certain book I equate: DSL = structure (=metamodel) + notation + constraints (which includes a type system) + semantics ;)

And as @ftomassetti asked elsewhere as well (I think): does Metamodel now have a name and an id field, and is that id field different from the node ID?

[enikao]

Does Metamodel now have a name and an id field?

I think name and id should definitely be separate:

• Ids are for computers, are meaningless in themselves, must be stable, and actually determine the identity of this metamodel.
• Names are for humans, should mean something, and can change without changing the identity of the metamodel.
  (Example: I might start with a metamodel "GitMaster" and rename it to "GitMain", but it's still the identical metamodel.)

[joswarmer]

(Meta)Model still has the connotation of being pictures, which don't even need to be executable. From this point of view I prefer language.

[enikao]

Decision via Slack vote: Rename to Language