I find it troubling that IGKT members cannot agree on individual knot component terminology.
Why is this so?
Because it's problematic and this isn't a group
of linguists or philosophers or scientists/engineers!?
For example, I still see a myriad of names/terms given to the 'nipping structure' in a Bowline:
[ ] turNip
[ ] nipping turn
[ ] nipping loop
[ ] nipping helix
[ ] nipping component
[ ] helix
[ ] helical component
[ ] helical compression component
[ ] radial compression zone
[ ] radial component
[ ] radial containment zone
[ ] compression zone
[ ] add your personal favourite...
Surely it cant be that big a deal to sort this out? If we can figure out quantum mechanics and SpaceX can soft land a first stage booster (and re-launch it again) - why cant we sort out our own house?
You must really be making hay to have so many
strawmen erected in just one post! --the reddened
entries are IMO purely your creation and nothing
that has been troubling others. "turNip" is purely
my cutesie/word-fusion moniker tossed in for quick
chatter, nothing I'd expect to travel up in First Class
seating. (Btw, I've not figured out quantum mechanics,
or even many car mechanics. As for "sorting my own
house," I've a long list of new-year's resolutions and
this usually tops it --annually.

)
loop, eye, bight, wraps, 180 degree U turn, 360 degree turn...
"Eye" is my urging so to stand clear of "loop"
which is in the common tongue; "eye" should
be UNconfusing but for being different --i.e.,
it shouldn't carry ambiguity, and with the simple
association --pointed out, if need be-- to the
common "eye splice" be acceptable,
even though we cannot erase "loop" usage.
Whereas "bight" has problematic aspects in its
knotting uses ("without ends" vs. "doubled"/folded
in half"/"U-shape(d)"), and then its seemingly
forgotten nautical (& inland marine, riparian?)
sense of some sort of curvature. (I myself find
it hard to speak of a rug's manifold "bights" vs.
"loops" of material.)
And then there's all of the 'bite's to fite, er, fight!
Similarly, "loop" is overloaded,
and "turn" as you indicate comes up for question
in trying to convert it into degrees --for sure
clarity, maybe best (word-fusion : 'mayBEst' !)
to attach a degree numeral to it, and let the
"turn" part indicate simply the rounding,
and the numeral specify the extent --not a
handy thing for teatime parlance, but quickly
and surely comprehended when encountered.
--dl*
====