Blender 2.8: Naming Conventions #56648

New Issue

In Blender 2.8, we are making some slight changes to naming conventions used throughout the app.

Rationale

By default in Blender, we use the English language. In any language, words have certain meanings.

Language is a communication tool, and the only way language can work, is if we adhere to the same meanings. Using wrong or misleading language serves nobody - it only makes simple things unnecessarily difficult to understand and learn.

So, we want to favour unambiguous, plain and standard language. In Blender, there are some examples where we simply aren't using the correct terms for things, and we want to fix that.

Here's a list of the changes:

Draw -> Display

Status: Done
In the context of information shown to the user, eg. Draw All Edges, Draw Type, Draw Method etc.

Draw:(Oxford) Produce (a picture or diagram) by making lines and marks on paper with a pencil, pen, etc..

Display:(Oxford) Show (data or an image) on a computer, television, or other screen.

The word 'draw' for displaying information is fundamentally confusing in a graphics application which includes actual drawing tools. The word 'display' is clearer and unambiguous. This also means changes for common word combinations, eg:

Draw Type -> Display As
Status: Incomplete
Display As [Wireframe] is unambiguous and clear, whereas 'draw type' is not.

Properties (N key) -> Sidebar

Status: Done
It used to be ambiguous if you were referring to the Properties area vs the Properties Editor. For this reason, we've changed the convention so that we use 'sidebar' for the N-key area and 'Properties' for the Properties Editor.

Group -> Collection

Status: Done

This reflects the merging of the old Groups and Layers into something new. Blender's old Groups wouldn't actually behave like a grouped item in the scene, and so the term was misleading. 'Collections' makes it clear that items are simply part of a collection.

Translate & Grab -> Move

Status: Done

In the context of the tool in the toolbar that lets users alter the position of items.

Translate:(Oxford): Express the sense of (words or text) in another language -or-convert something or be converted into(another form or medium) Translate can also mean, in formal terms: (Oxford) move (a bishop or, in Scotland, a minister) to another

Grab:(Oxford) Grasp or seize suddenly and roughly -or- obtain or get (something) quickly or opportunistically

Move: (Oxford) [with object] change the place, position

The 'Translate' button in Blender could never translate between German and Spanish. The word is ambiguous and not plainly clear.

Using 'Grab' to mean moving something from A to B is simply not correct.

'Move' is both more plain and clear.

Before/After:

Manipulator -> Gizmo

Status: Done
Shorter, more standard term.

Grease Pencil -> Annotate

Status: Done

Annotate:(Oxford) Add notes to (a text or diagram) giving explanation or comment

Gives a better idea of what the tool is for, rather than a reference to an object. This name also had to change because of the new Grease Pencil objects in 2.8.

X-Ray -> In Front

Status: Done
Blender 2.8 has an actual X-Ray feature now in the Shading popover which lets you look through objects. However, objects also have an X-Ray option which simply displays them on top of other objects. Using the same term for two different things here is confusing, and 'X-Ray' is not a good description of displaying in front.

Lamp -> Light

Status: Done

Lamp: (Oxford) A device for giving light, either one consisting of an electric bulb together with its holder and shade or cover
Light: (Oxford) A source of illumination

A sun can't be a lamp, but it is a light. 'Light' is a better generic term here.

Spin -> Lathe

Status: Not Yet

Spin: (Oxford) turn or whirl round quickly
Lathe: (Oxford) A machine for shaping wood, metal, or other material by means of a rotating drive which turns the piece being worked on against changeable cutting tools.

The Spin tool in Blender doesn't spin at all. 'Spin' implies movement. This is simply not the correct term. 'Lathe' is the correct term here.

Duplication -> Instancing

Status: Done
In the context of Particle instances, Collection instances, and the old DupliVerts/DupliFaces, which also creates instances.

Instances are a unique feature that saves memory, which isn't communicated by the term 'duplication'.

Before/After:

Actually duplicating objects and items should still use the term 'duplicate'.

Subsurf -> Subdiv

Status: Done

As a shorthand for Subdivision Surfaces, Subdiv is correct, Subsurf is not. 'Subsurf' is especially confusing because it sounds like Subsurface Scattering, which is something very different.

Center Points -> Origins

Status: Done

This is not a name change. Just to point out that we aren't being consistent here. Sometimes we refer to the origin point as 'center points', although mostly we refer to them as 'Origins'. We should use the same name everywhere. 'Center points' is also a bad name because, obviously, it's most often not in the center.

Circle Select -> Paint Selection

Status: Not Yet

Circle Select does not select circles. It doesn't even let you drag a circle around items to select them. What this tool is, is a way to paint selections, so that's what we should call it.

Border Select -> Box Select or Rectangle Select

Status: Done
Oxford: Border: 1: a line separating two countries. 2: the edge or boundary of something

Border Select does not select borders. It selects everything inside a box or rectangle.

Shape Key -> Morph Target

Status: Not Yet
The term 'Shape Key' is not a good word. It implies keyframing, which isn't what it does. This feature allows you to define a set of shapes to morph between. So, 'Morph Target' is a better term.

Border -> Region

Status: Done
This applies to Render Border, Clipping Border and other related features.

These features are not about rendering or selecting borders, but creating region for selection or rendering.

Ornaments -> Extras

Status: Done
Oxford: Ornament: A thing used or serving to make something look more attractive but usually having no practical purpose
An ornament is a superfluous, useless, decorative element.

Remove Doubles -> Merge by Distance

Alternatives: Distance Merge, Proximity Merge
Status: Done
The current Remove Doubles operator name is not clear: 'Doubles' implies exactly two items, even though it works in an arbitrary number of vertices. 'Remove' is also misleading - really it's just performing a merge operation.

Since this operator is really just a special kind of Merge that takes distance into account, the name can reflect that.

Add -> Create

(for placing new primitives into the scene)
Alternatives: Insert
Status: Not yet
Oxford: Add: Join (something) to something else so as to increase the size, number, or amount: a new wing was added to the building | some box offices now add on a convenience charge | (as adjective added) : one vitamin tablet daily will give added protection.

OR:

Put together (two or more numbers or amounts) to calculate their total value: they added all the figures up | add the two numbers together.

The term 'Add' is somewhat ambiguous, because it's used in maths to add to values together. We even use the term Add inside Blender for this in many places.

The term 'Create' is more specific and unambiguous, and is more widely used for this.

In Blender 2.8, we are making some slight changes to naming conventions used throughout the app. ## Rationale By default in Blender, we use the English language. In any language, words have certain meanings. Language is a communication tool, and the only way language can work, is if we adhere to the same meanings. Using wrong or misleading language serves nobody - it only makes simple things unnecessarily difficult to understand and learn. So, we want to favour unambiguous, plain and standard language. In Blender, there are some examples where we simply aren't using the correct terms for things, and we want to fix that. Here's a list of the changes: ## Draw -> Display *Status: Done* In the context of information shown to the user, eg. Draw All Edges, Draw Type, Draw Method etc. **Draw:***(Oxford) Produce (a picture or diagram) by making lines and marks on paper with a pencil, pen, etc..* **Display:***(Oxford) Show (data or an image) on a computer, television, or other screen.* The word 'draw' for displaying information is fundamentally confusing in a graphics application which includes actual drawing tools. The word 'display' is clearer and unambiguous. This also means changes for common word combinations, eg: **Draw Type -> Display As** *Status: Incomplete* Display As [Wireframe] is unambiguous and clear, whereas 'draw type' is not. ![Screen Shot 2018-09-01 at 20.37.06.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F4518738/Screen_Shot_2018-09-01_at_20.37.06.png) ## Properties (N key) -> Sidebar *Status: Done* It used to be ambiguous if you were referring to the Properties area vs the Properties Editor. For this reason, we've changed the convention so that we use 'sidebar' for the N-key area and 'Properties' for the Properties Editor. ![Screen Shot 2018-09-02 at 10.33.56.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F4518758/Screen_Shot_2018-09-02_at_10.33.56.png) ## Group -> Collection *Status: Done* This reflects the merging of the old Groups and Layers into something new. Blender's old Groups wouldn't actually behave like a grouped item in the scene, and so the term was misleading. 'Collections' makes it clear that items are simply part of a collection. ![Screen Shot 2018-09-02 at 10.34.47.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F4518780/Screen_Shot_2018-09-02_at_10.34.47.png) ## Translate & Grab -> Move *Status: Done* In the context of the tool in the toolbar that lets users alter the position of items. **Translate:***(Oxford): Express the sense of (words or text) in another language* -or-*convert something or be converted into(another form or medium)* Translate *can* also mean, in formal terms: *(Oxford) move (a bishop or, in Scotland, a minister) to another* **Grab:***(Oxford) Grasp or seize suddenly and roughly* -or- *obtain or get (something) quickly or opportunistically* **Move:** *(Oxford) [with object] change the place, position* The 'Translate' button in Blender could never translate between German and Spanish. The word is ambiguous and not plainly clear. Using 'Grab' to mean moving something from A to B is simply not correct. 'Move' is both more plain and clear. Before/After: ![Screen Shot 2018-09-03 at 14.51.54.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F4537923/Screen_Shot_2018-09-03_at_14.51.54.png) ## Manipulator -> Gizmo *Status: Done* Shorter, more standard term. ![Screen Shot 2018-09-02 at 10.34.35.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F4518782/Screen_Shot_2018-09-02_at_10.34.35.png) ## Grease Pencil -> Annotate *Status: Done* **Annotate:***(Oxford) Add notes to (a text or diagram) giving explanation or comment* Gives a better idea of what the tool is for, rather than a reference to an object. This name also had to change because of the new Grease Pencil objects in 2.8. ![Screen Shot 2018-09-02 at 10.35.08.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F4518784/Screen_Shot_2018-09-02_at_10.35.08.png) ## X-Ray -> In Front *Status: Done* Blender 2.8 has an actual X-Ray feature now in the Shading popover which lets you look through objects. However, objects also have an X-Ray option which simply displays them on top of other objects. Using the same term for two different things here is confusing, and 'X-Ray' is not a good description of displaying in front. ## Lamp -> Light *Status: Done* **Lamp:** *(Oxford) A device for giving light, either one consisting of an electric bulb together with its holder and shade or cover* **Light:** *(Oxford) A source of illumination* A sun can't be a lamp, but it is a light. 'Light' is a better generic term here. ![Screen Shot 2018-09-02 at 10.34.59.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F4518786/Screen_Shot_2018-09-02_at_10.34.59.png) ## Spin -> Lathe *Status: Not Yet* **Spin:** *(Oxford) turn or whirl round quickly* **Lathe:** *(Oxford) A machine for shaping wood, metal, or other material by means of a rotating drive which turns the piece being worked on against changeable cutting tools.* The Spin tool in Blender doesn't spin at all. 'Spin' implies movement. This is simply not the correct term. 'Lathe' is the correct term here. ## Duplication -> Instancing *Status: Done* In the context of Particle instances, Collection instances, and the old DupliVerts/DupliFaces, which also creates instances. Instances are a unique feature that saves memory, which isn't communicated by the term 'duplication'. Before/After: ![Screen Shot 2018-09-03 at 14.56.21.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F4537969/Screen_Shot_2018-09-03_at_14.56.21.png) Actually duplicating objects and items should still use the term 'duplicate'. ## Subsurf -> Subdiv *Status: Done* As a shorthand for Subdivision Surfaces, Subdiv is correct, Subsurf is not. 'Subsurf' is especially confusing because it sounds like Subsurface Scattering, which is something very different. ## Center Points -> Origins *Status: Done* This is not a name change. Just to point out that we aren't being consistent here. Sometimes we refer to the origin point as 'center points', although mostly we refer to them as 'Origins'. We should use the same name everywhere. 'Center points' is also a bad name because, obviously, it's most often not in the center. ![Screen Shot 2018-09-10 at 14.26.17.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F4652078/Screen_Shot_2018-09-10_at_14.26.17.png) ## Circle Select -> Paint Selection *Status: Not Yet* Circle Select does not select circles. It doesn't even let you drag a circle around items to select them. What this tool is, is a way to paint selections, so that's what we should call it. ## Border Select -> Box Select or Rectangle Select *Status: Done* Oxford: *Border: 1: a line separating two countries. 2: the edge or boundary of something* Border Select does not select borders. It selects everything inside a box or rectangle. ## Shape Key -> Morph Target *Status: Not Yet* The term 'Shape Key' is not a good word. It implies keyframing, which isn't what it does. This feature allows you to define a set of shapes to morph between. So, 'Morph Target' is a better term. ## Border -> Region *Status: Done* This applies to Render Border, Clipping Border and other related features. These features are not about rendering or selecting borders, but creating region for selection or rendering. ## Ornaments -> Extras *Status: Done* Oxford: *Ornament: A thing used or serving to make something look more attractive but usually having no practical purpose* An ornament is a superfluous, useless, decorative element. ## Remove Doubles -> Merge by Distance Alternatives: Distance Merge, Proximity Merge *Status: Done* The current Remove Doubles operator name is not clear: 'Doubles' implies exactly two items, even though it works in an arbitrary number of vertices. 'Remove' is also misleading - really it's just performing a merge operation. Since this operator is really just a special kind of Merge that takes distance into account, the name can reflect that. ## Add -> Create (for placing new primitives into the scene) Alternatives: Insert *Status: Not yet* Oxford: *Add: Join (something) to something else so as to increase the size, number, or amount: a new wing was added to the building | some box offices now add on a convenience charge | (as adjective added) : one vitamin tablet daily will give added protection.* OR: *Put together (two or more numbers or amounts) to calculate their total value: they added all the figures up | add the two numbers together.* The term 'Add' is somewhat ambiguous, because it's used in maths to add to values together. We even use the term Add inside Blender for this in many places. The term 'Create' is more specific and unambiguous, and is more widely used for this.

Added subscriber: @WilliamReynish

Added subscriber: @DuarteRamos

Removed subscriber: @DuarteRamos

Added subscriber: @DuarteRamos

Added subscriber: @pablovazquez

Added subscriber: @Scaredyfish

I would argue in favour of keeping Grab. I think the mnemonic benefit of using names that match the keyboard shortcuts tends to outweigh the nonstandard usage. Notice how the sidebar tends to get called the N panel, after its shortcut, although since it never had an N-based name, in this case changing the name makes no difference.

Added subscriber: @YAFU

Just my opinion here, is not that I am going to be angry with any decision you make.

I only use Blender so I do not know standard words of other software. One of the things that helped me most to remember keyboard shortcuts is when they are related to how the action/tool is called in Blender. About Grab, we could call it Move and change the keyboard shortcut to "M", but it is already occupied. Or, in Blender 2.79 if you go to Object > Transform menu the tool is called "Grab / Move - G". So if you make it consistent and everywhere it is called Grab / Move even with Search function (instead of Translate), we would have the good thing of both worlds (name related to keyboard shortcut and standard word of other softwares)

Just my opinion here, is not that I am going to be angry with any decision you make. I only use Blender so I do not know standard words of other software. One of the things that helped me most to remember keyboard shortcuts is when they are related to how the action/tool is called in Blender. About Grab, we could call it Move and change the keyboard shortcut to "M", but it is already occupied. Or, in Blender 2.79 if you go to Object > Transform menu the tool is called "Grab / Move - G". So if you make it consistent and everywhere it is called Grab / Move even with Search function (instead of Translate), we would have the good thing of both worlds (name related to keyboard shortcut and standard word of other softwares)

Added subscriber: @ManuelGrad

The rename Translate and Grab to Move makes alot of sense! Thank you! The name Grab is weird and just wrong.
For the ones that argue to keep Grab just because it matches the shortcut:
Does Select start with an "a"?
Does Proportional Editing start with an "o"?
Does Specials Menu start with a "w"?
Does the Sidebar start with "n"? (see, this example works this way too)

The rename Translate and Grab to Move makes alot of sense! Thank you! The name Grab is weird and just wrong. For the ones that argue to keep Grab just because it matches the shortcut: Does Select start with an "a"? Does Proportional Editing start with an "o"? Does Specials Menu start with a "w"? Does the Sidebar start with "n"? (see, this example works this way too)

Added subscriber: @cunabula

This is all good. Bumping slightly on Sidebar but only because the Toolbar is the other 'Sidebar'. Not really a big issue as long as their roles are kept separate as much as possible.

That X-Ray was a terrible name as, as you say, an X-Ray let's you see what's inside and this feature doesn't do that.

Draw Type -> Display As : this one is really good, any time you can make the label and the input box create a sentence makes what is happening really clear, legible and memorable.

This is all good. Bumping slightly on Sidebar but only because the Toolbar is the other 'Sidebar'. Not really a big issue as long as their roles are kept separate as much as possible. That X-Ray was a terrible name as, as you say, an X-Ray let's you see what's inside and this feature doesn't do that. Draw Type -> Display As : this one is really good, any time you can make the label and the input box create a sentence makes what is happening really clear, legible and memorable.

Manuel. Obviously the initial letter convention is not possible for all Blender features. The keys of a keyboard are limited and the functions/tools of Blender that need shortcuts are many more.
Just noting that the change from Grab to Move clearly benefits users of other software that choose industry standard keymap, not Blender users. Those who choose industry standard keyman will have a consistent standard name (Move) and a consistent keyboard shortcut (Move - Rotate - Scale) for what they are used to (three keys in a row or whatever developers have chosen for industry standard).
Blender users will not have consistent keyboard shortcuts anymore. "R" for Rotate, "S" for Scale, and "G"... Why and for what? For "M"ove? How to explain it? "G" is because "Grab" was the old name that it had in the old Blender before 2.8? It does not make sense to me.
"Grab / Move" as in 2.79 is the convenient name I can think of.
Just saying.

Edit:
Or I have another proposal. Since it seems that you do not mind the first letter convention, then in addition to making the change from Grab to Move, we also change the keyboard shortcut functionality between what is currently "G" and "M" key. This is, "M" now to move (old Grab) and "G" to move collections (Although I am not very convinced of this because "M" is very far from "R" and "S" keys)

Manuel. Obviously the initial letter convention is not possible for all Blender features. The keys of a keyboard are limited and the functions/tools of Blender that need shortcuts are many more. Just noting that the change from Grab to Move clearly benefits users of other software that choose industry standard keymap, not Blender users. Those who choose industry standard keyman will have a consistent standard name (Move) and a consistent keyboard shortcut (Move - Rotate - Scale) for what they are used to (three keys in a row or whatever developers have chosen for industry standard). Blender users will not have consistent keyboard shortcuts anymore. "R" for Rotate, "S" for Scale, and "G"... Why and for what? For "M"ove? How to explain it? "G" is because "Grab" was the old name that it had in the old Blender before 2.8? It does not make sense to me. "Grab / Move" as in 2.79 is the convenient name I can think of. Just saying. Edit: Or I have another proposal. Since it seems that you do not mind the first letter convention, then in addition to making the change from Grab to Move, we also change the keyboard shortcut functionality between what is currently "G" and "M" key. This is, "M" now to move (old Grab) and "G" to move collections (Although I am not very convinced of this because "M" is very far from "R" and "S" keys)

@YAFU While the Mnemonic G=Grab is useful for first time users it very quickly becomes irrelevant when it becomes part of muscle memory and that's something you really don't want to change for long term users by rebinding the default keys - it would also break every single tutorial ever created for Blender which is really bad.

There are so many short cut keys in Blender that the few that are mnemonic is really just sugar.

And after you've heard 'Press G to Move' for the fourth or fifth time the new user will remember it just as easily.

When the user has experience they won't even be needing to think about any of this at all so the names are arbitrary. 'I want this to be there' will just be 'G X 10 [Enter]' The connection to the words isn't important.

@YAFU While the Mnemonic G=Grab is useful for first time users it very quickly becomes irrelevant when it becomes part of muscle memory and that's something you really don't want to change for long term users by rebinding the default keys - it would also break every single tutorial ever created for Blender which is really bad. There are so many short cut keys in Blender that the few that are mnemonic is really just sugar. And after you've heard 'Press G to Move' for the fourth or fifth time the new user will remember it just as easily. When the user has experience they won't even be needing to think about any of this at all so the names are arbitrary. 'I want this to be there' will just be 'G X 10 [Enter]' The connection to the words isn't important.

Added subscriber: @zeauro

I don't think that the fact that would break tutorial should be a winning point to keep G to move. But it is important when you are modifying lots of things to avoid to change everything at same moment and keep some marks that will not lost old users that have knowledge about abilities of software, making them best people to create new tutorials.
Workspaces, 3D View, BI removal, Layers removal, etc ... If shortcuts had been the first change, nobody would have been able to follow these changes.

G is at center of keyboard and it is logical that he represents a fundamental action often called. It is a clever placement when you use all keys of keyboard in a complex software like Blender.
Everybody is free to disagree and adapts its configuration to ergonomics of its practice of the software since 2.5.

At beta state, there will be a need of people testing different keyboard configurations to debug customization of shortcuts. But because of this customization and because it will be a better time to discuss shortcuts closer to release, there is no reason to name things from their shortcut. The same way, a tutorial writer should have as a golden rule to always mention the tool rather than just the shortcut.

I don't think that the fact that would break tutorial should be a winning point to keep G to move. But it is important when you are modifying lots of things to avoid to change everything at same moment and keep some marks that will not lost old users that have knowledge about abilities of software, making them best people to create new tutorials. Workspaces, 3D View, BI removal, Layers removal, etc ... If shortcuts had been the first change, nobody would have been able to follow these changes. G is at center of keyboard and it is logical that he represents a fundamental action often called. It is a clever placement when you use all keys of keyboard in a complex software like Blender. Everybody is free to disagree and adapts its configuration to ergonomics of its practice of the software since 2.5. At beta state, there will be a need of people testing different keyboard configurations to debug customization of shortcuts. But because of this customization and because it will be a better time to discuss shortcuts closer to release, there is no reason to name things from their shortcut. The same way, a tutorial writer should have as a golden rule to always mention the tool rather than just the shortcut.

Quick note: This is not about changing hotkeys. Blender 2.79 and earlier put the name 'Translate' in the toolbar, even though the hotkey was G. The proposal here is simply that it says 'Move', that's all.

So it would go from saying 'Translate' in 2.79 to saying 'Move' in 2.8 and onwards.

Quick note: This is not about changing hotkeys. Blender 2.79 and earlier put the name 'Translate' in the toolbar, even though the hotkey was G. The proposal here is simply that it says 'Move', that's all. So it would go from saying 'Translate' in 2.79 to saying 'Move' in 2.8 and onwards.

Added subscriber: @jenkm

I also don't like "Grab" and G-key, and I use D-key (drag) instead and G-key for Grease Pencil.
The "Move" is much better.

Also, look at the "Proportional Editing", it doesn't seem quite correct to me.
Yeah, it's proportional to distance, but even just "Falloff" and "Falloff Type" would be better.

I also don't like "Grab" and G-key, and I use D-key (drag) instead and G-key for Grease Pencil. The "Move" is much better. Also, look at the "Proportional Editing", it doesn't seem quite correct to me. Yeah, it's proportional to distance, but even just "Falloff" and "Falloff Type" would be better.

@WilliamReynish Oops, yes noted, then these are definitely clearer descriptions.

Added subscribers: @ideasman42, @brecht

Personally, I'm fine with all these. The only downside I see is updating existing documentation and tutorials, but it seems acceptable.

@venomgfx or @ideasman42, if either of you has an objection to these changes let us know, otherwise I'll ahead and do them in one of the next weeks.

Personally, I'm fine with all these. The only downside I see is updating existing documentation and tutorials, but it seems acceptable. @venomgfx or @ideasman42, if either of you has an objection to these changes let us know, otherwise I'll ahead and do them in one of the next weeks.

Added subscriber: @CraigJones

When working with turning boxes using a lathe, it is the process of spinning the object to cut away from it. The Spin tool actually spins the selected geo around the cursor position. I think we get the same meaning from both, and I think Lathe is more common with other software, not necessarily a different meaning. Might make things easier to explain, all of these changes I mean.

A lathe is a tool for creating round things.

'Spin' means to spin something around. The spin tool does not spin anything around. It works as a lathe. So therefore, 'lathe'.

A lathe is a tool for creating round things. 'Spin' means to spin something around. The spin tool does not spin anything around. It works as a lathe. So therefore, 'lathe'.

Added subscriber: @Regnas

Translate & Grab to Move is excellent.
Lathe is okay too.

**Translate & Grab to Move** is excellent. Lathe is okay too.

Select Circle, its action is more like a "Paint Selection Tool" than select circle, (it looks as if it acts similarly to Select Border).

**Select Circle**, its action is more like a "Paint Selection Tool" than select circle, (it looks as if it acts similarly to Select Border).

Yevgeny: Yes, that's right. It makes it sound like you drag out a selection circle, which you don't. It should be 'Paint Selection' or ' Selection Paint'

The other thing is that it should not be 'Select Border' because you don't use it to select borders. It's misleading.

It should be 'Border Select' or 'Box Select'. Same for 'Select Lasso'. It doesn't select lassos - it's a a Lasso Select tool.

Yevgeny: Yes, that's right. It makes it sound like you drag out a selection circle, which you don't. It should be 'Paint Selection' or ' Selection Paint' The other thing is that it should not be 'Select Border' because you don't use it to select borders. It's misleading. It should be 'Border Select' or 'Box Select'. Same for 'Select Lasso'. It doesn't select lassos - it's a a Lasso Select tool.

3D Cursor is confused with the mouse/tool cursor, and it's more like "marker", "reference point", "pivot" than "pointer".

**3D Cursor** is confused with the mouse/tool cursor, and it's more like "marker", "reference point", "pivot" than "pointer".

Select Border -> Rectangle Selection?

And by the way, how about change the "Subsurf" name that appears here, to something like Subdiv or SDS? I never saw "Subsurf" in any 3D app.

Select Border -> Rectangle Selection? And by the way, how about change the "Subsurf" name that appears here, to something like Subdiv or SDS? I never saw "Subsurf" in any 3D app. ![9c60dcf0b4ebc2ab44c62b0e68dcc516a200f5ae.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F4578853/9c60dcf0b4ebc2ab44c62b0e68dcc516a200f5ae.png)

Regnas: It's already on the list. Rectangle Selection is another option, although Box Select or Box Selection keeps the B there. But Rectangle Selection is the plainer, clearer one, I agree.

Oh, I didn't saw it. Cool stuff. ?

Added subscriber: @Rawalanche

I agree with all of these. Very good choices.

Any special reason why the Sphere primitive is called "UV Sphere" instead of just Sphere like in every other 3D app?
Quite confusing..

Any special reason why the Sphere primitive is called "**UV** Sphere" instead of just Sphere like in every other 3D app? Quite confusing..

There is a reason. Currently, Blender ships with two types of sphere primitive, a UV Sphere and an Icosphere. These are mathematical terms for ways of creating spheres in 3D geometry. In the future, we may add a third type of sphere, Quad Sphere, which is a way to create spheres out of quads.

That said, it’s possible we could combine these primitive types and present them as options. The user would then select Sphere in the menu, and in the redo panel be presented with various sphere types.

There is a reason. Currently, Blender ships with two types of sphere primitive, a UV Sphere and an Icosphere. These are mathematical terms for ways of creating spheres in 3D geometry. In the future, we may add a third type of sphere, Quad Sphere, which is a way to create spheres out of quads. That said, it’s possible we could combine these primitive types and present them as options. The user would then select Sphere in the menu, and in the redo panel be presented with various sphere types.

Alright then. It's just that people might think it's somehow directly related with UV mapping.

And yes, combining these is a good idea, c4d did that too and it's pretty neat.

Alright then. It's just that people might think it's somehow directly related with UV mapping. And yes, combining these is a good idea, c4d did that too and it's pretty neat.

Added subscriber: @renderhjs

Added subscriber: @Rusculleda

In 2.8 there's a "Camera lock" subpanel of the "view" panel in the sidebar, but as I understand it, two of it's tree options don't involve the active camera at all but just the view, I find it a bit confusing: "Lock to object" and "Lock to 3d cursor" under "Camera Lock" seem to imply the camera is the one to be locked. Maybe "View lock" would be better, since the only option actually involving the camera ("Lock Camera to view") does mention it, though maybe some other more comprehensive name could be found.

Tomas: yes that makes sense.

Added subscriber: @lamoot

Blender's Shape Keys sounds like another item fit for change. Here's how other software names them:

Unity - blend shapes
Maya - blend shapes
Godot - blend shapes
3dsmax - morpher (modifier)
Unreal - morph targets
Modo - morphs
Lightwave - morphs

Blender's **Shape Keys** sounds like another item fit for change. Here's how other software names them: Unity - blend shapes Maya - blend shapes Godot - blend shapes 3dsmax - morpher (modifier) Unreal - morph targets Modo - morphs Lightwave - morphs

Re: Border Select -> Box Select or Rectangle Select

Would we also rename other operators that use the word Border?

Clipping Border
Render Border
Clear Render Border
Clear Viewer Border
Zoom to Border

Re: Shape Key -> Blend Shape

The rationale for renaming isn't quite correct since Shape keys can be used as key-frames (disable 'Relative').

Also, the term Blend is a bit overloaded in Blender, also, you can: blend blend shapes in a your blend file :) (See Blend from Shape operator).

Don't have a strong opinion here but if we rename at all, I'd choose a name with least confusion with other areas of Blender (Morph Target?).

Re: **Border Select -> Box Select or Rectangle Select** Would we also rename other operators that use the word Border? - Clipping Border - Render Border - Clear Render Border - Clear Viewer Border - Zoom to Border --- Re: **Shape Key -> Blend Shape** The rationale for renaming isn't quite correct since Shape keys can be used as key-frames (disable 'Relative'). Also, the term Blend is a bit overloaded in Blender, also, you can: *blend blend shapes in a your blend file* :) (See *Blend from Shape* operator). Don't have a strong opinion here but if we rename at all, I'd choose a name with least confusion with other areas of Blender (Morph Target?).

Added subscriber: @TheRedWaxPolice

Hi. Just a quick suggestion.
For selection tools, "Rectangle Select" is correct, but when it comes to Render/viewport visibility, the most common used name is "Region".
So maybe you should consider renaming those to: Render Region, Clipping Region, Clear Render Region etc...

By the way, those are very useful operators, maybe they should be more exposed in the UI.

EDIT: About the Shape Key, if Blend Shape is not possible, I'd be okay with, Shape Morph or Pose Morph. ?

Hi. Just a quick suggestion. For selection tools, "Rectangle Select" is correct, but when it comes to Render/viewport visibility, the most common used name is "Region". So maybe you should consider renaming those to: Render Region, Clipping Region, Clear Render Region etc... By the way, those are very useful operators, maybe they should be more exposed in the UI. EDIT: About the Shape Key, if Blend Shape is not possible, I'd be okay with, Shape Morph or Pose Morph. ?

Yep, I agree that rectangle select is a standard name for it, but in context of all the others listed, "Region" is the most appropriate name.

The reason for this is that while selections usually offer more shapes (circle, lasso, paint, rectangle), clipping, render, viewer and zoom regions are always bound to be rectangular, so it doesn't need to be said explicitly.

Yep, I agree that rectangle select is a standard name for it, but in context of all the others listed, "Region" is the most appropriate name. The reason for this is that while selections usually offer more shapes (circle, lasso, paint, rectangle), clipping, render, viewer and zoom regions are always bound to be rectangular, so it doesn't need to be said explicitly.

Morph Targets are also fine, and avoids the double use of ‘blend’.

Render Region I think is ok, because the fact that it is a rectangle is implicit. You would not be able to use other shapes for that anyway :)

For selection, we offer a few ways to make selections based on different shapes, so the fact that it is a box or rectangle is important.

Morph Targets are also fine, and avoids the double use of ‘blend’. Render Region I think is ok, because the fact that it is a rectangle is implicit. You would not be able to use other shapes for that anyway :) For selection, we offer a few ways to make selections based on different shapes, so the fact that it is a box or rectangle is important.

One very unfortunate name in 2.8 is "Ornaments" in Overlays pop-over menu. Ornament refers to something very specific: https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1920&bih=1058&ei=6jqzW7LsFIWQrgTfjpToAw&q=ornament&oq=ornament&gs_l=img.3..35i39k1j0l9.2998.3656.0.3943.11.11.0.0.0.0.125.732.5j3.8.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..3.8.727.0...0.6uDX_eHTVbA

What that toggle actually toggles in viewport is referred to as "Helpers" or "Dummies" in other 3D packages. For example "Camera helper", "Light helper" etc...

If "Helpers" or "Dummies" would be too ambiguous, then "3D Icons" would be yet another appropriate name for that toggle.

One very unfortunate name in 2.8 is "Ornaments" in Overlays pop-over menu. Ornament refers to something very specific: https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1920&bih=1058&ei=6jqzW7LsFIWQrgTfjpToAw&q=ornament&oq=ornament&gs_l=img.3..35i39k1j0l9.2998.3656.0.3943.11.11.0.0.0.0.125.732.5j3.8.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..3.8.727.0...0.6uDX_eHTVbA What that toggle actually toggles in viewport is referred to as "Helpers" or "Dummies" in other 3D packages. For example "Camera helper", "Light helper" etc... If "Helpers" or "Dummies" would be too ambiguous, then "3D Icons" would be yet another appropriate name for that toggle.

Ludvik: yes, I agree - 'helpers' is a better term here I think.

An ornament is something decorative but usually useless.

Ludvik: yes, I agree - 'helpers' is a better term here I think. An ornament is something decorative but usually useless.

Added subscriber: @tintwotin

I would suggest that the word "Movie" (ex. Movie Clip Editor) in Blender was changed to ex. "Video" or just "Clip".

A movie is a feature-length fiction film you would go to the cinema and watch, not a source clip.

So when using it like this: "Sequencer > Add > Movie" and then you actually add a "video source clip", is like saying a "word" is a "page-turner"

(Unless of course, your source material is a movie :-) ).

I would suggest that the word "Movie" (ex. Movie Clip Editor) in Blender was changed to ex. "Video" or just "Clip". A movie is a feature-length fiction film you would go to the cinema and watch, not a source clip. So when using it like this: "Sequencer > Add > Movie" and then you actually add a "video source clip", is like saying a "word" is a "page-turner" (Unless of course, your source material is a movie :-) ). ```

The problem with the term "Helper" and it's synonym "Assistant", is it is very vague and sounds like it might do something (allow you to perform tasks more easily, interactive or expose functionality).

In this case they don't, they only display extra details.

The problem with the term "Helper" and it's synonym "Assistant", is it is very vague and sounds like it might *do* something (allow you to perform tasks more easily, interactive or expose functionality). In this case they don't, they only display extra details.

Campbell: You are not wrong, but think of the context.

Overlays -> Ornaments sounds like you can add useless decoration in the viewport, whereas Overlays -> Helpers sounds like exactly what it is, in that context. You already know it's an overlay.

You could also call it 'Visual Aids' although that also sounds like Visual AIDS, which is bad.

Another option is 'Extras'. A few well known apps use this term.

Campbell: You are not wrong, but think of the context. Overlays -> Ornaments sounds like you can add useless decoration in the viewport, whereas Overlays -> Helpers sounds like exactly what it is, in that context. You already know it's an overlay. You could also call it 'Visual Aids' although that also sounds like Visual AIDS, which is bad. Another option is 'Extras'. A few well known apps use this term.

Technically they are handles from the Oxford Dictionary Handle: (Noun)The part by which a thing is held, carried, or controlled. which is what they do after all.
They provide a way to select or manipulate abstract objects that have no real geometry or representation of their own

It might also sound vague and uninformative though, and may falsely suggest bezier curve handles. Manipulators is another possibility, though it may also allude to gizmos

Other possibilities, Trims: Decoration; especially, decoration placed along edges or borders or Adornments
I'd be totally fine with either helpers or ornaments

Technically they are **handles** from the Oxford Dictionary **Handle**: (Noun)*The part by which a thing is held, carried, or controlled.* which is what they do after all. They provide a way to select or manipulate abstract objects that have no real geometry or representation of their own It might also sound vague and uninformative though, and may falsely suggest bezier curve handles. *Manipulators* is another possibility, though it may also allude to gizmos Other possibilities, **Trims:** *Decoration; especially, decoration placed along edges or borders* or **Adornments** I'd be totally fine with either *helpers* or *ornaments*

I think either of these is fine, and all of them more descriptive than 'ornaments'

Helpers
Handles

Extras

I think either of these is fine, and all of them more descriptive than 'ornaments' - Helpers - Handles # Extras

Side note for the recent units commit: meter, centimeter is only the correct spelling in the US, everywhere else it should be metre, centimetre...

A meter is a device for measuring things not the metric unit of length.

Side note for the recent units commit: meter, centimeter is only the correct spelling in the US, everywhere else it should be metre, centimetre... A meter is a device for measuring things not the metric unit of length.

Added subscriber: @antoniov

From Wikipedia:

"Metre is the standard spelling of the metric unit for length in nearly all English-speaking nations except the United States and the Philippines which use meter. Other Germanic languages, such as German, Dutch, and the Scandinavian languages likewise spell the word meter.

Measuring devices (such as ammeter, speedometer) are spelled "-meter" in all variants of English. The suffix "-meter" has the same Greek origin as the unit of length."

From Wikipedia: "Metre is the standard spelling of the metric unit for length in nearly all English-speaking nations except the United States and the Philippines which use meter. Other Germanic languages, such as German, Dutch, and the Scandinavian languages likewise spell the word meter. Measuring devices (such as ammeter, speedometer) are spelled "-meter" in all variants of English. The suffix "-meter" has the same Greek origin as the unit of length."

AFAIK we use US English in Blender? We also don't call it 'colour' or 'randomise'. Likewise, we should stick to 'meter' and not 'metre'. Same for 'centre' vs 'center'

As a native British English speaker I wouldn't mind making all of Blender British English. Oi mate, ello ello. Nah, just having a laugh. I think we should stick to US English.

AFAIK we use US English in Blender? We also don't call it 'colo**u**r' or 'randomi**s**e'. Likewise, we should stick to 'meter' and not 'metre'. Same for 'centre' vs 'center' As a native British English speaker I wouldn't mind making all of Blender British English. Oi mate, ello ello. Nah, just having a laugh. I think we should stick to US English.

Meters and Centimeters is what I am used to. In fact, this is the first time in 27 years of my life that I got to know that "metre" and "centimetre" are actually valid words, and not a typo. I fact, even google doesn't think so, and considers it a typo :D :

Regarding the "Ornaments" discussion. If "helpers" causes issues, then let's try "3D Icons". That's also very descriptive.

Meters and Centimeters is what I am used to. In fact, this is the first time in 27 years of my life that I got to know that "metre" and "centimetre" are actually valid words, and not a typo. I fact, even google doesn't think so, and considers it a typo :D : ![image.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F4922850/image.png) Regarding the "Ornaments" discussion. If "helpers" causes issues, then let's try "3D Icons". That's also very descriptive.

Ludvik: I guess you are not British then. In any case, Blender uses US English, and so our spelling should follow US English spelling. It's that simple.

Ah, if the convention is US English then that's fine. A little annoying but fine :)

In #56648#539681, @WilliamReynish wrote:
Campbell: You are not wrong, but think of the context.

Overlays -> Ornaments sounds like you can add useless decoration in the viewport, whereas Overlays -> Helpers sounds like exactly what it is, in that context. You already know it's an overlay.

Even in this context, we toggle gizmo's which are interactive (and not exactly an overlay).

You could also call it 'Visual Aids' although that also sounds like Visual AIDS, which is bad.

Another option is 'Extras'. A few well known apps use this term.

Prefer 'Extras' over 'Helpers', while vague it's not misleading,

Although it does have the down side of suggesting showing the camera or lamp is something 'Extra' (not something that's default which users expect to always see).

Part of the confusion AFAICS is this option is hard to summarize, it's basically this meaning (when negated):

Disable most non-rendered guides which interfere with viewing the final result except for those which are needed for editing & animation (selection origins for eg).

It's a light-weight way to disable overlays, without making the view-port unusable. However we name, it's an approximation and not something you can fit a dictionary definition. An issue with using general terms is we could have buttons named the same elsewhere which do different things.

> In #56648#539681, @WilliamReynish wrote: > Campbell: You are not wrong, but think of the context. > > Overlays -> Ornaments sounds like you can add useless decoration in the viewport, whereas Overlays -> Helpers sounds like exactly what it is, in that context. You already know it's an overlay. Even in this context, we toggle gizmo's which are interactive (and not *exactly* an overlay). > You could also call it 'Visual Aids' although that also sounds like Visual AIDS, which is bad. > > Another option is 'Extras'. A few well known apps use this term. Prefer 'Extras' over 'Helpers', while vague it's not misleading, Although it does have the down side of suggesting showing the camera or lamp is something 'Extra' (not something that's default which users expect to always see). Part of the confusion AFAICS is this option is hard to summarize, it's basically this meaning (when negated): *Disable most non-rendered guides which interfere with viewing the final result except for those which are needed for editing & animation (selection origins for eg).* It's a light-weight way to disable overlays, without making the view-port unusable. However we name, it's an approximation and not something you can fit a dictionary definition. An issue with using general terms is we could have buttons named the same elsewhere which do different things.

Added subscriber: @Znio.G

i think "Extras display" will be more fitting.

Ok, 'extras' it is then. Updated.

Renamed:

ornaments -> extras
border select -> box select

Renamed: - ornaments -> extras - border select -> box select

We should also rename the Cursor to Center entry in the Snap menu (Shift+S), to something like Cursor to World Origin, or just Cursor to World but it's less descriptive. But currently Cursor to Center is confusing, as it suggests the center of the objects, or selection, it's not clear.

@ideasman42 I could go ahead change it in the menus but I guess the operator itself should also be renamed, if we agree on a name.

bpy.ops.view3d.snap_cursor_to_center()

We should also rename the **Cursor to Center** entry in the Snap menu (Shift+S), to something like **Cursor to World Origin**, or just Cursor to World but it's less descriptive. But currently Cursor to Center is confusing, as it suggests the center of the objects, or selection, it's not clear. @ideasman42 I could go ahead change it in the menus but I guess the operator itself should also be renamed, if we agree on a name. `bpy.ops.view3d.snap_cursor_to_center()`

Pablo: completely agree with those.

“Cursor to Center” is such ambiguous wording. Which center? The fact the it turns out to be the world origin you’d never guess.

Pablo: completely agree with those. “Cursor to Center” is such ambiguous wording. Which center? The fact the it turns out to be the world origin you’d never guess.

Added subscriber: @TuomoKeskitalo

Suggestion to change Spin -> Revolve

Revolve (oxford): Move in a circle on a central axis
Revolve is a verb, whereas Lathe is a noun

Suggestion to change Spin -> Revolve - Revolve (oxford): Move in a circle on a central axis - Revolve is a verb, whereas Lathe is a noun

Should we rename 'operator' to 'command' ?

Noticed some of the UI docs refer to commands, but AFAICS this wasn't proposed/agreed on, (P835 for reference).

They'd still be operators in the code bpy.types.Operator, bpy.ops.*, etc

Should we rename 'operator' to 'command' ? Noticed some of the UI docs refer to commands, but AFAICS this wasn't proposed/agreed on, ([P835](https://archive.blender.org/developer/P835.txt) for reference). *They'd still be operators in the code `bpy.types.Operator`, `bpy.ops.*`, etc*

@ideasman42

I think we should use the term 'Operator' when referring to the internal implementation.

We should use 'Command' as a term for actions, like Remove Doubles. Subdivide etc, which take effect immediately. We can then use 'Tools' or 'Active Tools' to describe something that stays active. Both tools and commands use operators under the hood to perform modifications.

@ideasman42 I think we should use the term '`Operator`' when referring to the internal implementation. We should use '`Command`' as a term for actions, like Remove Doubles. Subdivide etc, which take effect immediately. We can then use '*Tools*' or '*Active Tools*' to describe something that stays active. Both tools and commands use `operators` under the hood to perform modifications.

Added subscriber: @rdnmnm

I'm actually strongly against "Lathe" .
First of all, the word it self isn't as understandable as it may seem. Someone using english as second language might actually not learn this word for years, as it is only used in context of woodworking or machining.
Second of all, I think words should be used in a 3D modelling software context. In this case the tool is creating a Surface of Revolution- a mathematical term. Therefore most CAD software (Fusion, AutoCAD, Solidworks) uses the name "Revolve" for those tools.
Even if "Revolve" might not be a simple enough term for the tool, it still sets a precedent to "Spin", as a middle ground for CAD users and artist .

I'm actually strongly against "Lathe" . First of all, the word it self isn't as understandable as it may seem. Someone using english as second language might actually not learn this word for years, as it is only used in context of woodworking or machining. Second of all, I think words should be used in a 3D modelling software context. In this case the tool is creating a Surface of Revolution- a mathematical term. Therefore most CAD software (Fusion, AutoCAD, Solidworks) uses the name "Revolve" for those tools. Even if "Revolve" might not be a simple enough term for the tool, it still sets a precedent to "Spin", as a middle ground for CAD users and artist .

@WilliamReynish ok, so "Operator Search" should be renamed to "Command Search", "Repeat Last Action" -> "Repeat Last Command" ?

@ideasman42: I would think so, yes. Although with those things they really are referring to the underlying operator in a way. It's debatable. No particular strong opinion.

@rdnmnm: We could go with Revolve instead of Lathe or Spin.

Added subscriber: @elbox01

@ideasman42 this space before "Only Origins" is it an intentional one, or is it a Design bug?

If it was intentional, in the design "point of view" it would be better to align it just like the others.
IMO though,
Greeting.

@ideasman42 this space before "Only Origins" is it an intentional one, or is it a Design bug? ![Capture.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F5799254/Capture.png) If it was intentional, in the design "point of view" it would be better to align it just like the others. IMO though, Greeting.

Chiming in on the Spin / Lathe question.

Appreciate it's difficult to come up with an unequivocal name for what the tool does. Currently I see it's called 'Screw' and this seems worse than 'Spin'. Screw implies tapering and directional movement perpendicular to the axis along which the modifier operates and an implicit confusion with an actual screw (which the tool doesn't create). Screw (Spin/Lathe) doesn't create 'screws'.

Not entirely keen on Lathe as that's a piece of machinery that you use to 'turn' a cylindrical block of stuff into a desired profile. It will be obscure to someone without an engineering/woodworking background and isn't quite right anyway. Also 'Turn' wouldn't work as it will be confused with rotate. There's nothing about the modifier that applies the desired final profile to any object in the scene.

What the tool does is take a desired final profile and an axis of rotation and creates a cylindrical version the profile around that axis. So perhaps 'Cylindrify' would work? Appreciate it could be difficult for non-English speakers at first but it does go well with Solidify. And yes, you can choose less than /more than 360 degree rotation but I think that's splitting hairs.

Also the current Icon implies two axis rotation and translation which is a confusing visual metaphor. A dotted axis with the classic vase / face illusion would be better as that's a thing I think most people would recognise qv. http://www.kidsmathgamesonline.com/images/pictures/illusions/facesorvase.jpg

Chiming in on the Spin / Lathe question. Appreciate it's difficult to come up with an unequivocal name for what the tool does. Currently I see it's called 'Screw' and this seems worse than 'Spin'. Screw implies tapering and directional movement perpendicular to the axis along which the modifier operates and an implicit confusion with an actual screw (which the tool doesn't create). Screw (Spin/Lathe) doesn't create 'screws'. Not entirely keen on Lathe as that's a piece of machinery that you use to 'turn' a cylindrical block of stuff into a desired profile. It will be obscure to someone without an engineering/woodworking background and isn't quite right anyway. Also 'Turn' wouldn't work as it will be confused with rotate. There's nothing about the modifier that applies the desired final profile to any object in the scene. What the tool does is take a desired final profile and an axis of rotation and creates a cylindrical version the profile around that axis. So perhaps 'Cylindrify' would work? Appreciate it could be difficult for non-English speakers at first but it does go well with Solidify. And yes, you can choose less than /more than 360 degree rotation but I think that's splitting hairs. Also the current Icon implies two axis rotation and translation which is a confusing visual metaphor. A dotted axis with the classic vase / face illusion would be better as that's a thing I think most people would recognise qv. http://www.kidsmathgamesonline.com/images/pictures/illusions/facesorvase.jpg

@cunabula Currently it's still called Spin. There's a 'Screw' modifier but that's something else.

'Cylindrify' is ok, although it's not a real word in use afaik.

'Lathe' is both a real and normal word, and pretty accurately describes what the tool does. It's also the standard term for this kind of operation. Even Wikipedia refers to this as 'lathe', see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lathe_(graphics)

The goal for these name changes, is to use real and standard words for things, rather than obscure and wrong ones.

@cunabula Currently it's still called Spin. There's a 'Screw' modifier but that's something else. 'Cylindrify' is ok, although it's not a real word in use afaik. 'Lathe' is both a real and normal word, and pretty accurately describes what the tool does. It's also the standard term for this kind of operation. Even Wikipedia refers to this as 'lathe', see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lathe_(graphics) The goal for these name changes, is to use real and standard words for things, rather than obscure and wrong ones.

I wonder if Only Origins would be more explicit if it were named "Positions Only".
"Only Origins" may falsely suggest we are changing object origins, by leaving the geometry static and moving the centers only.

"Positions Only" reflects much better what the option does, since scaling or rotating don't affect object scale or rotation, nor its geometry; only its coordinates in the scene.

![Capture.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F5799254/Capture.png) I wonder if *Only Origins* would be more explicit if it were named "Positions Only". "Only Origins" may falsely suggest we are changing object origins, by leaving the geometry static and moving the centers only. "Positions Only" reflects much better what the option does, since scaling or rotating don't affect object scale or rotation, nor its geometry; only its coordinates in the scene.

Removed subscriber: @tintwotin

Added subscriber: @JonathanLampel-4

Can we rename Select Sharp Edges to Select by Edge Angle? It should also probably be under Select by Trait as well since it is selecting according to a trait. It has nothing to do with edges that are Sharp, and having two meanings for the same word gets confusing.

Can we rename Select Sharp Edges to Select by Edge Angle? It should also probably be under Select by Trait as well since it is selecting according to a trait. It has nothing to do with edges that are Sharp, and having two meanings for the same word gets confusing. ![image.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F5995662/image.png)

Added subscriber: @JulienKaspar

Could we rename Brush Curve into something more functional? Currently it is just Curve, and in other 2d software it is referred differently like 'hardness' or 'shape' etc.

Added subscriber: @L0Lock

What about "Link" and "Append" ?

In some other software, its "Reference" and "Merge" (at least, Maya does "references", 3DS does "XRefs" and "Merge").

Don't know for other softwares though. But in my experience, "reference" and "merge" also often used in common everyday English language, non-native English speakers might understand those easier. And those words are everywhere in forums.

What about "Link" and "Append" ? In some other software, its "Reference" and "Merge" (at least, Maya does "references", 3DS does "XRefs" and "Merge"). Don't know for other softwares though. But in my experience, "reference" and "merge" also often used in common everyday English language, non-native English speakers might understand those easier. And those words are everywhere in forums.

Added subscriber: @Harley

A couple comments...

Further up this thread @Regnas asked about "UV Sphere". I'm pretty sure that is a name made up by Blender and is used nowhere else. A better name that better describes it would be "Polar Sphere". So we would have "Isosphere", "Polar Sphere", and (later) "Quadsphere".

I've also seem some comments about our repeated usages of "Add". It gets confusing to have multiple "Adds" in different places. And I agree that it would be nice to replace some of those where we can. If we are selecting items and extending a previous selection we could use "Append" rather than "Add" (and "Remove" instead of "Subtract").

If we are putting primitives into a scene, that menu could be "Insert". The words seem similar, but "Insert" might be less ambiguous in our context. "Add" could be assumed to be a Boolean operation, or even something mathematical, while "Insert" might be pretty clear.

A couple comments... Further up this thread @Regnas asked about "UV Sphere". I'm pretty sure that is a name made up by Blender and is used nowhere else. A better name that better describes it would be "Polar Sphere". So we would have "Isosphere", "Polar Sphere", and (later) "Quadsphere". I've also seem some comments about our repeated usages of "Add". It gets confusing to have multiple "Adds" in different places. And I agree that it would be nice to replace some of those where we can. If we are selecting items and extending a previous selection we could use "Append" rather than "Add" (and "Remove" instead of "Subtract"). If we are putting primitives into a scene, that menu could be "Insert". The words seem similar, but "Insert" might be less ambiguous in our context. "Add" could be assumed to be a Boolean operation, or even something mathematical, while "Insert" might be pretty clear.

My suggestions:

    Remove Doubles -> Merge Doubles
    Or:            -> Merge Overlaps

My suggestions: ``` Remove Doubles -> Merge Doubles Or: -> Merge Overlaps

Both ‘overlaps’ and ‘doubles’ are not accurate descriptions. It merges based on distance.

Both ‘overlaps’ and ‘doubles’ are not accurate descriptions. It merges based on *distance*.

@Harley:

Most apps use ‘Create’ rather than ‘Insert’, which is at least as uncommon as ‘Add’. If it is to be changed, we might as well use ‘Create’.

@Harley: Most apps use ‘Create’ rather than ‘Insert’, which is at least as uncommon as ‘Add’. If it is to be changed, we might as well use ‘Create’.

Most apps use ‘Create’ rather than ‘Insert’

That would work too. I wasn't that wedded to "Insert" to be honest, just nice to not have "Add" for everything if possible.

> Most apps use ‘Create’ rather than ‘Insert’ That would work too. I wasn't that wedded to "Insert" to be honest, just nice to not have "Add" for everything if possible.

@L0Lock

IMO Link is okay, but append should really be just "Import .blend" or "Library import", functionally it's not much different from importing other formats. Maybe link could be "Library link"

@L0Lock IMO Link is okay, but append should really be just "Import .blend" or "Library import", functionally it's not much different from importing other formats. Maybe link could be "Library link"

I agree with you Doubles doesn't describe it, and I will agree with you if just the Operator renamed to "Merge by Distance" or executing it under a menu on its own like Mesh -> Merge by Distance , but putting it under Clean Up menu doesn't make sense either. at least must have some sort of Clean, Remove, Multiples, Overlaps ...

I agree with you `Doubles` doesn't describe it, and I will agree with you if just the Operator renamed to "Merge by Distance" or executing it under a menu on its own like `Mesh -> Merge by Distance` , but putting it under `Clean Up` menu doesn't make sense either. at least must have some sort of Clean, Remove, Multiples, Overlaps ...

Added subscriber: @KalyanS

I think it should be put under Clean Up. Removing doubles is something you do to remove unwanted mesh data i.e. clean your mesh, not an operation that changes the form of your object.

I think it should be put under `Clean Up`. Removing doubles is something you do to remove unwanted mesh data i.e. clean your mesh, not an operation that changes the form of your object.

+1 to rename the 'Add' menu to 'Create'.

Add can mean a blending mode when talking colour, adding something to a collection, add up, add as in math.

+1 to rename the 'Add' menu to 'Create'. Add can mean a blending mode when talking colour, adding something to a collection, add up, add as in math.

Removed subscriber: @TuomoKeskitalo

Added subscriber: @GavinScott

Can I suggest that "factory settings" is a little weird and maybe consider at some point just making it "default settings"?

The term "factory settings" usually applies to a physical device that came from a factory somewhere. Seems a bit odd to use in software, and where the "factory" is a bit nebulous at best.

Can I suggest that "factory settings" is a little weird and maybe consider at some point just making it "default settings"? The term "factory settings" usually applies to a physical device that came from a factory somewhere. Seems a bit odd to use in software, and where the "factory" is a bit nebulous at best.

+1 to rename factory settings to default settings. Maybe default preferences since its edit->preferences?

The down side of this is you manage your own default settings.

Many users will be familier with the term "Factory Settings" from hardware that often has this feature (phones, cameras, TV's).

Currently under the "Defaults" there is a "Save Startup" option.
Since you just saved defaults, it's not clear what loading them should do.

It could be renamed to "Factory Defaults" instead of "Factory Settings", I don't have a strong opinion on this.

The down side of this is you manage your own default settings. Many users will be familier with the term "Factory Settings" from hardware that often has this feature (phones, cameras, TV's). Currently under the "Defaults" there is a "Save Startup" option. Since you just saved defaults, it's not clear what loading them should do. It could be renamed to "Factory Defaults" instead of "Factory Settings", I don't have a strong opinion on this.

Another name change we could do is to the term Make - as in Make Links, Make Parent, Make Single User, Make Meta-Strip, Make Local, Make Proxy, etc.

The use of the word 'make' here is rather odd grammatically, and in some cases misleading, such as with 'Make Parent' - you aren't actually making a parent, you are just setting a parent/child relationship.

Here are some examples of better wordings:

Make Links -> Link To
Make Parent -> Set Parent
Make Single User -> Set Unique Data
Make Local -> Append Linked Data into This File
Make Meta-Strip -> New Meta-Strip
Make Proxy -> New Proxy
etc

These are just a few examples, but in many of these cases we can come up with proper titles that much more accurately describe what they represent, without the odd use of 'make'.

Another name change we could do is to the term *Make* - as in Make Links, Make Parent, Make Single User, Make Meta-Strip, Make Local, Make Proxy, etc. The use of the word 'make' here is rather odd grammatically, and in some cases misleading, such as with 'Make Parent' - you aren't actually *making* a parent, you are just setting a parent/child relationship. Here are some examples of better wordings: Make Links -> Link To Make Parent -> Set Parent Make Single User -> Set Unique Data Make Local -> Append Linked Data into This File Make Meta-Strip -> New Meta-Strip Make Proxy -> New Proxy etc These are just a few examples, but in many of these cases we can come up with proper titles that much more accurately describe what they represent, without the odd use of 'make'.

Make Links -> Link To

This one is particularly confusing! A lot of items in the Make Links menu are not linking at all, in the way that the rest of Blender uses the term.

What about the word 'Transfer' instead? It's clear, fits all use cases, and is already used by one of the items.

> Make Links -> Link To This one is particularly confusing! A lot of items in the Make Links menu are not linking at all, in the way that the rest of Blender uses the term. What about the word 'Transfer' instead? It's clear, fits all use cases, and is already used by one of the items.

Added subscriber: @ConradDueck

Added subscriber: @PawelSwierczynski

It seems there is inconsistency in the naming of the Rip tool.

In the toolbar, it's called Rip Region and Rip Edge.

In the menu:

My suggestion:

Rip Region -> Rip Vertex/Edge --> Rip Vertices/Edges
Rip Edge -> Rip Vertex and Extend --> Rip Vertices and Extend

note: why Rip Vertex and Extend and not Rip Vertex/Edge and Extend?

even though you can technically do that with an edge, it seems completely useless for any purpose.
there is an equivalent in the Vertex menu already.

It seems there is inconsistency in the naming of the Rip tool. In the toolbar, it's called Rip Region and Rip Edge. ![Screenshot_36.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F8318551/Screenshot_36.png) In the menu: ![Screenshot_38.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F8318558/Screenshot_38.png) My suggestion: **Rip Region -> Rip Vertex/Edge --> Rip Vertices/Edges Rip Edge -> Rip Vertex and Extend --> Rip Vertices and Extend** note: why *Rip Vertex and Extend* and not *Rip Vertex/Edge and Extend*? - even though you can technically do that with an edge, it seems completely useless for any purpose. - there is an equivalent in the Vertex menu already. ```

Added subscriber: @Matthew-Hinson

Some suggestions from my side:

Snap > Snap With > Center ---> Pivot
As a new Blender user myself, I assumed "Center" meant the center of the bounding box around the selection, but the tooltip taught me otherwise: apparently it's the "transformation center", which is called the "transformation pivot point" in other parts of Blender. Renaming this to "Pivot" would avoid this confusion and increase consistency.

Snap > Project onto Self ---> Snap to Self or Snap to Current Object
Maybe the snapping implementation involves projection somehow, but it would be nicer if this were simply called what it is. "Snap to Self" is one option but might be misinterpreted as "snapping the selection to itself" (even if that makes no sense), so "Snap to Current Object" might be better.

Image Editor > Sidebar > Image > X/Y ---> Width/Height
When "Source" is set to "Generated." These fields are dimensions but are labeled like coordinates. Also, this is inconsistent with the Image > New (Alt-N) popup, which does use "Width"/"Height".

UV Editor > Sidebar > Image > UV Vertex > X/Y ---> U/V
UV Editor > Sidebar > View > 2D Cursor > Location X/Y ---> Location U/V
For obvious reasons.

Also some tooltip problems I noticed:

Add Cube > Depth > Cursor Plane: "Start placement using a point projected onto the orientation axis at the 3D cursor position"
The mouse cursor is projected onto a plane, not an axis. Suggestion: "Start placement using a point projected onto the plane that intersects the 3D cursor and is aligned to the transform orientation."

Image Editor > Sidebar > Scopes > Sample Line > Luma/RGB/...: "Channels to display when drawing the histogram"
The "Sample Line" scope plots intensity levels, not pixel counts, and is therefore not a histogram.

Some suggestions from my side: **Snap > Snap With > Center ---> Pivot** As a new Blender user myself, I assumed "Center" meant the center of the bounding box around the selection, but the tooltip taught me otherwise: apparently it's the "transformation center", which is called the "transformation pivot point" in other parts of Blender. Renaming this to "Pivot" would avoid this confusion and increase consistency. **Snap > Project onto Self ---> Snap to Self** or **Snap to Current Object** Maybe the snapping implementation involves projection somehow, but it would be nicer if this were simply called what it is. "Snap to Self" is one option but might be misinterpreted as "snapping the selection to itself" (even if that makes no sense), so "Snap to Current Object" might be better. **Image Editor > Sidebar > Image > X/Y ---> Width/Height** When "Source" is set to "Generated." These fields are dimensions but are labeled like coordinates. Also, this is inconsistent with the Image > New (Alt-N) popup, which does use "Width"/"Height". **UV Editor > Sidebar > Image > UV Vertex > X/Y ---> U/V** **UV Editor > Sidebar > View > 2D Cursor > Location X/Y ---> Location U/V** For obvious reasons. Also some tooltip problems I noticed: **Add Cube > Depth > Cursor Plane: "Start placement using a point projected onto the orientation axis at the 3D cursor position"** The mouse cursor is projected onto a plane, not an axis. Suggestion: "Start placement using a point projected onto the plane that intersects the 3D cursor and is aligned to the transform orientation." **Image Editor > Sidebar > Scopes > Sample Line > Luma/RGB/...: "Channels to display when drawing the histogram"** The "Sample Line" scope plots intensity levels, not pixel counts, and is therefore not a histogram.

Download

What's New

Blender Studio

Manual

Developers Blog

Documentation

Benchmark

Blender Conference

Development Fund

One-time Donations

Blender 2.8: Naming Conventions #56648

Rationale

Draw -> Display

Properties (N key) -> Sidebar

Group -> Collection

Translate & Grab -> Move

Manipulator -> Gizmo

Grease Pencil -> Annotate

X-Ray -> In Front

Lamp -> Light

Spin -> Lathe

Duplication -> Instancing

Subsurf -> Subdiv

Center Points -> Origins

Circle Select -> Paint Selection

Border Select -> Box Select or Rectangle Select

Shape Key -> Morph Target

Border -> Region

Ornaments -> Extras

Remove Doubles -> Merge by Distance

Add -> Create

Extras