Semantics Question

[__]

Due to recent observations that my <topics created>:<replies created> ratio is “absurd”… I submit the following to the css-tricks community:

Say you have an object that can be observed by an observer.
You call it observable.

Say you have another object, which can observe the observable object.
What do you call it?

This isn’t a riddle; it’s actually something that’s been nagging me for weeks. I can’t manage to phrase the question in a way that I get anything meaningful from google.

I do not want the word “observer.” An observer is something that is observing, not something that can observe. Closest to my meaning would be “observerable,” which I have seen elsewhere, but I don’t feel a valid construct (and not very clear, either). Maybe there isn’t a word. I dunno… it’s just seriously bugging me. Thanks for your time, all; here’s hoping!

[Alen]

Dispacher, Listener, watcher, looker, spectator, viewer, beholder, gazer… just throwing words out there

[__]

Thanks… the reason I don’t think “observer” is appropriate is because it is an “is-doing” form of the word, not a “can-do” form. Like all other words I can think of.

What do you think of “observerable”?
Right meaning, but it doesn’t sound “correct” to me. But, as I said, I’ve seen it elsewhere.

[nixnerd]

Due to recent observations that my <topics created>:<replies created> ratio is “absurd”

You know I meant that in the best possible way right? I meant you’re not a “taker.”

Congratulations on your new badge! For your fourth post, you get a gold star.

*Back to the question: This question seems almost philosophical in nature. Very Platonic. We’re not merely looking for synonyms, we’re looking for precise meaning. I agree that “observable” is better suited to the TARGET, i.e. the object which CAN BE OBSERVED and should NOT be used to denote the object which CAN observe but IS NOT currently observing.

Now, I understand your hesitation to use the word “observer” because it more accurately describes an object that is currently observing, not one that merely CAN observe.

I would argue that all these suffer from the same deficiency:

Dispacher, Listener, watcher, looker, spectator, viewer, beholder, gazer

However, let me submit this: Why not use the word “observer” to denote the object which CAN observe and use the word “observing” to denote the object which not only CAN observe but is currently observing?

This answer is no doubt unsatisfactory. However, I know from being a philosophy nerd that the English language is devoid of certain nuances and constructs that ancient languages had. Greek, Latin and Hebrew in particular were far more expressive and precise than English.

I know it sucks that you’d have to name one object after a present-tense verb… but I think it’s the best solution.

BTW, is this for an actual program? Are you trying to name classes?

[__]

However, let me submit this: Why not use the word “observer” to denote the object which CAN observe and use the word “observing” to denote the object which not only CAN observe but is currently observing?

Mm. This might be the “least un-satisfactory” solution.
Even though the logic basically reduces to “quit whining and deal with it.”

BTW, is this for an actual program? Are you trying to name classes?

Yes. It’s for a pair of traits that implement the Observer pattern. The observable trait makes its object capable of being observed (i.e., makes it a Subject), while the trait in question will make an object capable of observing Subjects.

(Beyond being picky about the exact meaning of the word, “-able” is my suffix of choice because the collection of traits I’m writing all make an object “capable” of doing something.)

[nixnerd]

What do you think of “observerable”?

I don’t like it.

Reason #1: It’s a made up word. If we’re going to use that, we should just use an allegorical or analogous naming scheme from a spy movie or real world items or something. No shame in that though.

Reason #2: It is confusing. The two-letter diff. is buried in the middle of a relatively long word. If this is going in real code, it will confuse everyone. Might even trip you up a few times. At least “observing” has a different suffix.

[nixnerd]

(Beyond being picky about the exact meaning of the word, “-able” is my suffix of choice because the collection of traits I’m writing all make an object “capable” of doing something.)

Ahhhh… ok. Now I get it. Let me ponder this a bit longer.

[nixnerd]

Clarity question: Is an observable object always being observed by at least one observer? Or is it possible for an object to be observed by NO OTHER object at a given time?

I think you know where I’m going with this :)

[__]

I don’t like it…

Those are the two exact reasons I don’t like it.

However, in English, there are varying degrees of validity for “made-up” words.

Is an observable object always being observed by at least one observer?

Nope. The observable might be observed by zero, one, or more observers throughout the life of the program. Likewise, an “observerable” might actually observe zero, one, or more subjects. It’s all about the ability, not the specific behavior.

[nixnerd]

However, in English, there are varying degrees of validity for “made-up” words.

Agreed. You’re talking to a very early adopter of the term “weak sauce” and I just recently started saying “gorg-ina,” albeit in an ironic and mocking tone.

There are two logical and semantic ways to go about this:

#1:

Observational – An object which CAN observe but is not necessarily currently observing. This is good because the name gives it distinction from the other two types, but it also describes the nature of the object. It is by definition an object that pertains to observation, just might not be doing it right now. This is an adjective… but it still works I think.

Observer – An object which is observational, but is also CURRENTLY observing.

Observable – An object which can be observed.

#2:

Observable – An object which CAN observe but is not necessarily currently observing. I think this makes sense to programmers (which is arguably all that matters) but doesn’t necessarily follow the constructs of the English language, which we’ve already covered.

Observer – An object which CAN observe, but is also CURRENTLY observing.

Observe – An object which can be observed. This is a verb, but I think it still works. It’s name is almost an instruction… something akin to “look” or “watch.” It’s saying “Hey Observable, observe me!” Now, this “instruction” is informal insofar as it’s not actually an instruction in the code/program. But, it does make logical sense.

Observed – An object which can be observed and is CURRENTLY BEING OBSERVED. This may or may not be necessary… but it gives you the very extensible option to have more granular control in the future, should you need it.

I think option #2 is probably the best. But, that’s just my opinion. BTW, the previous suggestion I made will be referred to as option #0, in keeping with conventions.

[nixnerd]

Context for the world amalgamation “gorg-ina“:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jigicP1Qvo

Go to 1:17 on the video.

My wife was watching this video and as soon as I heard it, I knew it would be in my repertoire for a while.

[__]

oh god… being the OP, I’m glad I have a “Bury” option…

Don’t take it personally…

Dammit, I hate the internet

[Alen]

Lol.

English is my second language so don’t look for me to solve this for ya.

[nixnerd]

oh god… being the OP, I’m glad I have a “Bury” option…
Don’t take it personally…
Dammit, I hate the internet

Oh no worries! I’m kind of glad you did! Wasn’t that satisfying to bury that video and make her face fade? If you like that, you’ll love the new in-browser game “Gorg-ina!”

It’s very simple… you just have to click all her faces away in less than 6 seconds. Then, you feel awesome. Give it a shot!

*Back to the issue: Did you decide how you’re going to solve this?

[nixnerd]

Aaaaaaaand a meme for future use:

Feel free to bury this too. But, I think something magical just happened on this thread and I just want to curate the record for posterity’s sake. Bury away!

[Author]

Posts