Triplea: Game Name & Map Name Terminology

[DanVanAtta]

I think it should say "game name", as that is what the players have visible the most, it is what they select and it should give a more specific insight, for maps having two or more games. For example, if a player is playing "WAW 1940", it makes the most sense that it should tell such game name, instead of delving into finding what is the map name for that game, and posting "world_at_war". On top of this, the map names have the issue that are usually defined differently (upper cases additions and underscores removals) when you are prompted to download the maps, so the game name is consistent the most.

So, I strongly advice changing "which map are you playing" with "which game are you playing" and "Map" with "Game" in the report.

_Originally posted by @Cernelius in https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/pull/6984#issuecomment-652397382_

[DanVanAtta]

This topic comes up a number of times. The fundamental problem is that the terms have different meanings based on context (or domain). For players, the distinction between a map and game is nothing, the two are interchangeable, worse yet, a 'game' has less meaning. Players will say "which map", and "I'm in a game".

For map makers, the two terms have technical meanings and are important. Those meanings however do not carry over to players. In part, this is because the two contexts are different, we should not necessarily try to unify these terms as it's artificial and players have a defined terminology that is immutable whether we like it or not. Just because we ask them to call 'maps' to be more properly 'games' does not change it. In effect, it gets confusing.

For map makers, the terminology is important as the 'map' is the folder name. It's actually not that great of a distinction anyways as the 'map name' in the XMLs is a 'code-hint'. It's something that really should not be needed but is because the code is too naive to remember which map it found an XML in (and worse yet it does an unnecessary validation check that for no actual reason forces this consistency).

For historical reasons, it made a lot more sense when you had say for example "chess", the concept of a game made more sense. Now that we no longer have different games, but just different rule sets, the distinction is really gone.

For terminology, a "game" is less meaningful as a "map" can be considered to include it's rules. Fundamentally there is a mismatch as players will download "maps" and then they are asked to select a "game". Without knowing the internal structure, this is really random to them and has no distinction. They download maps, so why don't they then select a map to play? More to the point, the difference between a map and a game is a detail for the game engine to worry about, players do not care about it, do not know about it, nor should they. Hence, its' a distinction that it's important as a game-engine detail, but it's an implementation detail players do not need to be exposed to (nor should they).

I think also in part the original terms are bad. A 'map' is really a 'board', a 'game' is a 'ruleset'. A 'board' and 'ruleset' are ackward terms but more representative. So fundamentally the problem is that we made up terms in the code and then asked that everyone use those terms even though they clash with natural names that people use. When that happens you wind up just having two different languages and a translation in between.

Where do we go into the future?

• The map name attribute in XMLs I'd like to have removed as it's a code-hint and does not need to be there. Perhaps we should have called a XML a Map and a set of XMLs with graphics a map-bundle, or a 'game' and a 'game-bundle', but at this point the existing XMLs are going to live with the existing terminology.
• Player facing, I don't think we need to nitpick the distinction of map vs game. It's important for XML and map makers, for players its a meaningless and potentially confusing distinction. Ultimately the two terms are probably going to be mostly interchangeable, for the sake of consistency a 'map' could be what we call a 'game' today, and a 'game' will be an instance of a 'GameData'. IE: you select a map, then you can start and save a game. So you play on a map, where you start a game.

Bottom line, 'map' and 'game' are useful terms for map makers, but for players, in practice, they mean different things - we should stop trying to unify the two meanings as they will never be compatible, players will always use terms that are natural to them - trying to make them switch is futile. The best we could have done was use those same terms in XML, but it's already too late that. At this point I think we need to realize we have the same terms meaning different things in different contexts, and simply deal with that as well as we can.

[DanVanAtta]

Re-reading the above, I think the conclusion I have is that we have the following for domain terminology:

Map Making / Internal Game Engine:

• map = the folder or zip containing XMLs and Graphics
• game = a XML specifying rules and configuration

Players / Game Engine:

• map = something you download, select, and start a game on
• game = a live instance of a game, on a map. You can start, stop, save and load games

The concept of a 'bundle' maybe would be useful at a player level to refer back to what map-makers would term a map.

Be what it may, the above is the domain terminology. I believe the above is immutable fact, it's observable from the natural language players actually use. Us trying to change that to an artificial other is a losing battle.

Going forward, the map/game terminology is too deeply baked into map making to change at the XML level. The best outcome I think we can have is to unify more of the game-engine and player facing terminology to align with the actual domain terminology.

[DanVanAtta]

@Cernelius I think the terminology of "saved game" really proves that players do not think of "games" as XML, as a "saved game", a "loaded game" is not a XML but is a "game" that was launched using a map + XML. It comes down to "map" and "game" not being quite the right terms for what they represent at the map maker level. The big distinction between them is only important for us that know about the back-end and it's a distinction map makers are forced to make because it's important, but only because the game engine does not make it easier on map makers.

[Cernelius]

@Cernelius I think the terminology of "saved game" really proves that players do not think of "games" as XML, as a "saved game", a "loaded game" is not a XML but is a "game" that was launched using a map + XML.

Mind-reading what players "think" is a possible perspective, but this matter seen on the side of what is actually happening is yet another confirmation that a "game" is one of those files inside the "games" folder of any map (that are currently in XML format, and maybe in the future they will be in some other format, so calling them XML is not very good (I think it is better calling them "game files" or something like that)). Once you have saved the game, you can go inside the "games" folder and delete everything in there and you will be able still to load your saved games, because only the skin is needed (skin=map-game) (the skin that comes with the map is called "original skin", to differentiate it from mapskins (but only a very few maps have any)). So the fact that we say "saved game" and not "saved map" I think it is another element that is generally correct and coherent with the current terminology.

As far as I know, a "saved game" is the same thing of a game file (XML), except that it is in a different format, it contains the history of the game (which is not a necessary element) and it is loaded through a different process (clicking on one button instead of another one).

I think also in part the original terms are bad. A 'map' is really a 'board', a 'game' is a 'ruleset'.

I certainly disagree on the equivalence between "game" and "ruleset", as I tend to see the ruleset as the set of all rules, thus excluding the starting setup (for example, the units already on the map (if I add 1 infantry somewhere I'm not creating a different rules set)) and the map elements defined by the game file (for example the production values). So, I tend to see the "game" as the combination of the "rules set" and the "setup". World War II Revised and World War II Revised LHTR are an example of two games of the same map that differ on the "rules set" only, while World War II v5 1942 Second Edition and World War II v5 1942 SE TR are an example of two games of the same map that differ on the "setup" only. Moreover, I would split a "rules set" into general and specific rules. For example, World War II v3 1941 and World War II v3 1942 would be two games of the same map having different setup and specific rules, but the same general rules.

For what is worth, how we usually define "rules set" is actually referring to the "general rules", otherwise we should have 2 different "rules sets" for the two games of the v3 map, instead of one, as we have documented (they have the same general rules but different turns order):
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/wiki/Game-Rule-Sets

So, under our current definition, the turns order (Germans going first or Japanese going first or whatever the like) would be not part of the "rules set" for any game, otherwise we would have 2 "rules sets" instead of only 1, for "v3". Moreover, the fact that we have "Big World : 1942 v3 Rules" in there too implies that by "Rules Sets" we maybe mean merely the set of all properties defined in the game file, also excluding whatever other elements.

So, all considered, I think I would rather say that a "rules set" is the sum of all "properties" defined in the game file (xml), excluding anything else (the setup, the territory definitions and values, the units names and values, and so on), that is "rules set" = "properties set".

[DanVanAtta]

Not trying to mind read @Cernelius , but if you look at the language players use, they do not have the map makers distinction of 'game' vs 'map' (nor should they).

A saved game is no longer related to the game XML, it's not another format but it's the data from the XML loaded into Java objects and appended with more data. Hence you generally no longer need the XML once a game is saved. I think that in part proves the point that the word "game" does not mean a "XML".

The real point is that there are different domains, different contexts. The same words have different meanings depending on perspective. The second point is that players have a different context compared to map makers.The third point is that the map maker domain terms, "map" and "game" are arguably badly chosen, but be what it may. The last point is that because we have different contexts, and "map" and "game" are almost interchangeable for players, we're not really winning by making a distinction that is important one context, but meaningless (and arguably wrong) from another context.

[DanVanAtta]

Generally, the terminology of "loading a game" and a "game file" are slightly contradictory depending on perspective. A "game file" can be a '.tsvg' file, but for map makers a 'game file' is a XML. Hence why I think the map maker terms are historical and perhaps no longer the best. I'll re-iterate though that for map makers the two terms have one meaning, and for better or worse they have different meanings to players. To a player, a map is the XML file, and a game is the .tsvg file. To a map maker a game is a XML and a map is a folder containing a variety of files. The latter part, calling a folder containing a set of files a 'map' is perhaps where I think the naming mistake was made.

[DanVanAtta]

It's also interesting to look at the genesis of the terms.

The developers had to call these things something in code. So a folder container map files was called a 'map', labelled as such in code, and the 'xml' was called a game. This ignored that you could have game saves and those were different files. So the term 'loading a game' then becomes weird.

The root cause is really just developers choosing improper domain terminology. Then, the names from the code were directly exposed to map makers, as many coding details are. This forced an important terminology onto map makers, which then makes it weird as the terminology is flawed (game can be a tsvg or a XML), and players have no inclination to know about "XML" files, nor to know that those are the "game files", not the thing they download, and it leaves no good name for a 'game save' which is what would be more naturally thought of as a 'game'.

[Cernelius]

Not trying to mind read @Cernelius , but if you look at the language players use, they do not have the map makers distinction of 'game' vs 'map' (nor should they).

To make a simple example, if I would think at regular players taking about Revised OOB and Revised LHTR, I think they would say that they are the same map but they are different games, which would be fully in line with the traditional TripleA terminology.

I guess we could ask random players the following questions:
1- Are Revised OOB and Revised LHTR the same map?
2- Are Revised OOB and Revised LHTR the same game?

If they answer yes to the first question and no to the second one, then we would have "demonstrated" that regular players have about the same map makers distinction of "game" vs "map".

[DanVanAtta]

To focus the conversation and demonstrate the point, we can focus on the term "loading a game". If you talk to a map maker, it means reading an XML file. Though, if you talk to a player, it means restoring a save from tsvg file.

So you can: load a map, specify rules, and start a game. A game really then is the collection of the Map files, the XML, and the settings used to start the game. I think unless we are in the map making domain, this is likely the terminology that is being used and likely that should be assumed.

At some point when starting a game you'll be able to specify even more of the properties defined in XML, perhaps even switching any map from V3 to say global rules, or back to classic. Part of this, perhaps you could, per game, specify unit stats as a setting. Hence, game is really more than just the XML file, particularly to players. If a game is just the XML, then what are you starting after having selected a "game", and specified settings, (like bid and technologies). What are you saving once you have started? You're not saving a XML file. You're saving the game, the game is the XML and more.

[DanVanAtta]

, I think they would say that they are the same map but they are different games,

IMO that is only because we use the term 'game' in a specific way. That is our bias IMO. I think it's: same map, different rules (unit configuration can be considered the starting rules).

[DanVanAtta]

1- Are Revised OOB and Revised LHTR the same map?

Same map, different rules.

2- Are Revised OOB and Revised LHTR the same game?

No, but a game is not just the XML. If you select no tech and start, are you starting a game? The thing you then save is a 'tsvg' file, is that not a game? If the saved 'tsvg' file is a game, then how can the XML be a game?

I think the answer to that last question is because of context. The terms have different meanings to different people. Map makers have a code and game engine perspective.

For example, the game engine calls 'factions' players in one context, but it also calls the participants in lobby 'players' as well. The game engine really is bad at this naming game as it then tried to call human players "nodes" to avoid confusion with actual players. The naming of TripleA is not always the best, we are seeing that with the artificial 'map' vs 'game' distinction that is forced on map makers. (And players do not share that perspective, they start, load and save games, they select maps).

[DanVanAtta]

Ask a player which maps do you play? You'll get answers like "NWO", "CW", "TWW".
Ask a player which games do you play? They'll probably say TripleA. Now that TripleA no longer offers chess, 'game' and 'map' have become almost interchangeable (but never for map makers as they need to stick to the terms the engine defined in code, and use those terms as it's important).

The 'player' name is an example as the engine decided a player is a faction. XMLs have no knowledge of multi vs single player games, so the term 'player' being a 'faction' is just fine (and only becomes a problem when you go to a different context and suddenly 'player' means something else; which is what we're seeing with the 'map' vs 'game' terms from different perspectives).

[Cernelius]

To focus the conversation and demonstrate the point, we can focus on the term "loading a game". If you talk to a map maker, it means reading an XML file. Though, if you talk to a player, it means restoring a save from tsvg file.

As far as I'm concerned, here I'm sure you are loading a game in both cases. The only difference is that in the second case you are loading a game in progress (you would just say "reloading").

[DanVanAtta]

here I'm sure you are loading a game in both cases

You are, because game has different meanings in different contexts. But to a player, a game is not a XML file, it is a XML file, map, and the settings they selected along with any moves, dice rolls and other turns they have taken.

[DanVanAtta]

So my point, to a map maker, game = xml file. To a player, game = XML file and a lot more.
But also to a player, a 'map' is the XML file and map image and config files. A map maker though does not call that a map as the map is those files plus all XML files. Players don't have the bundling perspective, they don't realize a map contains multiple XML files. To them, each XML file is just as well duplicated with all the map files.

Say for example, you copied all zip contents "n" times and put only one XML in each. This is how players view a 'map'. The bundling of XML files is transparent to them, for all they know each XML file has its own set of graphics and is not shared with any other.

[tvleavitt]

Honestly, this discussion is kind of head spinning to try and follow.

As an end-user, perhaps heavily influenced by participating in these
threads as a tester, this is what I see:

TripleA - both a "game", as I would talk to a naive third party, and an
"engine" that lets me play a bunch of different "games" (like D&D).

Maps - what I'm prompted to download, and what I play, thought of in the
context of TripleA as the scenario / "game" being played

Game - an instantiation of a map in TripleA, a hybrid combination of the
two in action; if someone asks me what I'm doing, I'd say, "I'm playing a
game." "What game are you playing? Grayhawk Wars on TripleA."

Save game - a point in a game at which I've saved, that I can load in
TripleA to resume said game

I don't really understand the technical distinction between games and maps
from a map maker / developer perspective, even after following this and the
previous thread, and it doesn't seem like, from a non-mapmaker, player
perspective, there is one.

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 3:59 PM Dan Van Atta [e-mail]
wrote:

So my point, to a map maker, game = xml file. To a player, game = XML file
and a lot more.
But also to a player, a 'map' is the XML file and map image and config
files. A map maker though does not call that a map as the map is those
files plus all XML files. Players don't have the bundling perspective, they
don't realize a map contains multiple XML files. To them, each XML file is
just as well duplicated with all the map files.

Say for example, you copied all zip contents "n" times and put only one
XML in each. This is how players view a 'map'. The bundling of XML files is
transparent to them, for all they know each XML file has its own set of
graphics and is not shared with any other.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/6994#issuecomment-652685963,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABB5HAMSMX6FA4SW6Y4FMH3RZO5TRANCNFSM4ONYUQSA
.

--
Thomas Leavitt
Internet enabled since 1990

[DanVanAtta]

@tvleavitt, FWIW, hopefully this helps more than it confused

Map Maker Perspective

The structure of a map is generally:

• map_name/
  
  
  
  • map/
    
    
    
    
    
    • games/
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      • wwII_v1.xml
      
      
      
      
      • wwII_v2.xml
      
      
      
      
    
    
    
    • polygons.txt
    
    
    
    • baseTiles/
    
    
    
  
  

When you download a map, you are downloading the entire bundle above. It can include multiple XML files. In very early development, this whole bundle (minus XMLs) was called the map. The focus was on rendering a map image, defining territories and having unit images.

Also in early development (talking the 2000s to around 2015), you could also have radically different games. Like Chess, or Checkers which could be distributed with the same map, just multiple XML files, or distributed as entirely different maps.

So, after you download the above, a 'map', you can then choose a game 'an XML file'.

That is the map maker perspective and those terms are baked into the XML configuration and the parts of the game engine related to parsing a map.

Development Perspective

From a development perspective, there are actually multiple things referred to as a game (it's a cluster..). In the code that loads map contents and parses an XML, the terminology is consistent with the map maker perspective.

The code then has something called a GameData which is also a 'game'. The GameData is the god data structure of the latest game state, a save-game is nothing more than the GameData being serialized to disk via Java Object Serialization. This object and its state is roughly what players think of as a game (it's a base-XML, map, settings, and all game actions that have happened in the game).

Player Perspective

Players see a list of games, to them these are maps. The fact that the maps are not actually duplicated but have shared graphics and more is transparent. IE: players are not aware if each game is coming from a different folder, or if they are all in the same folder. The map-maker distinction between map and game is transparent to players.

Hence, when players say 'start a game', they typically mean that you are in a staging screen, have selected a "map", have chosen settings, and you have clicked "play". So to a player, 'starting a game' is clicking "play" and is not selecting an XML.

The Problem

The term 'game' has multiple meanings.

• It is an XML file,
• It is a GameData instance (which what you get when you launch a game, save it, or load it)

If you are playing World War II Revised, and you ask a map maker which map are they playing, the answer is 'world_war_ii'_revised' (per the XML tag and folder name, which must match). If you ask a player, which game are you playing, either they'll say "World War II Revised" or they'll say "TripleA".

[Cernelius]

I don't really understand the technical distinction between games and maps from a map maker / developer perspective, even after following this and the previous thread, and it doesn't seem like, from a non-mapmaker, player perspective, there is one.

There are many cases. If you are familiar with "v3", that is a single map that offers two games, the 1941 and the 1942 one. If you are familiar with "Global", that is a single map that offers two games, the 1940 and the 1942 one, plus a lot more that are old versions or mods of various kind.

In general, the most typical case of offering multiple games for the same map is starting the game at different historical periods (like in 1940, in 1941 or in 1942, if it is a World War 2 map). Maybe the most extreme case of this you can find in the @FrostionAAA age_of_tribes map, in which you can choose to start waging war with mammoths or with nukes.

This is a map:
world_war_ii_global

These are games (and actually they are all games of the aforementioned map):
World War II Global 1940 Canadian Mod with Combat Move First
Ozteas 1941 Global Setup
World War II Global 1940 Original
World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition
World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition with Combat Move First
World War II Global 1940 Balanced Mod3 with Combat Move First
World War II Global 1940 Balanced Mod3
World War II Global 1942 2nd Edition

Is it all perfectly clear now?

[DanVanAtta]

@Cernelius I'm trying to impress on you that your explanation is clear and consistent for map makers. Players don't necessarily realize that maps and games are not 1 for 1.

What's more, if you 'save game', or 'load a game', you are dealing with '.tsvg' files, not XML files. Hence the confusion when we carry the map maker terms over to the players.

[tvleavitt]

@Cernelius

Ah, I see. I had not previously noticed this. So, there's not a one for one
correlation between "Maps" as downloads, and "Games" as listed when you hit
the "Select Map" button (which is not what you're actually doing, or
rather, you are, but as a side effect of picking a "Game", rather
confusing). And you can only see which map a "Game" is associated with
after you select an individual map. Am I guessing that it is entirely
possible for a game to be compatible with more than one "map", but simply
be distributed with a second copy of the map that is otherwise identical,
because two creators don't want to share the same map name, or maybe one
creator doesn't think a game is suitable for inclusion in the bundle they
manage?

Side note: the dark grey background behind the black text in the map
descriptions makes them rather difficult to read due to the lack of
contrast.

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:46 PM Cernelius [e-mail] wrote:

I don't really understand the technical distinction between games and maps
from a map maker / developer perspective, even after following this and the
previous thread, and it doesn't seem like, from a non-mapmaker, player
perspective, there is one.

There are many cases. If you are familiar with "v3", that is a single map
that offers two games, the 1941 and the 1942 one. If you are familiar with
"Global", that is a single map that offers two games, the 1940 and the 1942
one, plus a lot more that are old versions or mods of various kind.

In general, the most typical case of offering multiple games for the same
map is starting the game at different historical periods (like in 1940, in
1941 or in 1942, if it is a World War 2 map). Maybe the most extreme case
of this you can find in the @FrostionAAA https://github.com/FrostionAAA
age_of_tribes map, in which you can choose to start waging war with
mammoths or with nukes.

This is a map:
world_war_ii_global

These are games (and actually they are all games of the aforementioned
map):
World War II Global 1940 Canadian Mod with Combat Move First
Ozteas 1941 Global Setup
World War II Global 1940 Original
World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition
World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition with Combat Move First
World War II Global 1940 Balanced Mod3 with Combat Move First
World War II Global 1940 Balanced Mod3
World War II Global 1942 2nd Edition

Is it all perfectly clear now?

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/6994#issuecomment-652715467,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABB5HAPDLDVND5ONNGCB27DRZPKHJANCNFSM4ONYUQSA
.

--
Thomas Leavitt
Internet enabled since 1990

[Cernelius]

@Cernelius Ah, I see. I had not previously noticed this. So, there's not a one for one correlation between "Maps" as downloads, and "Games" as listed when you hit the "Select Map" button (which is not what you're actually doing, or rather, you are, but as a side effect of picking a "Game", rather confusing).

In 1.8.0.9 and as far back as I remember, that button was (correctly) called "Choose Game" (you can still download 1.8.0.9, if you are curious). Only a few years ago this was changed to the current partial nonsense of having a "Select Map" button that opens a "Select a Game" window with a list of "Games". Yes, I already complained about this change, to no effect. That button should be called "Select a Game", not "Select Map".

[Cernelius]

Am I guessing that it is entirely possible for a game to be compatible with more than one "map", but simply be distributed with a second copy of the map that is otherwise identical, because two creators don't want to share the same map name, or maybe one creator doesn't think a game is suitable for inclusion in the bundle they manage?

This is not only possible, but it is so in many cases. Most of the variants actually are the same skin or skins that could have been the same when they initially branched out. And many of them were games in skin-less maps referencing the original skins of their maps, but all such cases have been converted in stand-alone maps a few years ago.

One example amongst many, try to open "New World Order", then open "New World Order 5 Nations". They could have been totally part of the same map, but, for some reasons, they are not.

And, as you correctly say, this distinction is not hidden to the common user. Everyone can see it when selecting any game. For example, this is what you see in the "Select a Game" window:

New World Order 5 Nations
Map Name: nwo_variants
Number Of Players: 5
...

But I can agree with @DanVanAtta that likely most regular users are not going to notice it. I've never said otherwise, but it is of little importance to me. Maybe the "Select a Game" window should present a list of maps and, when you click on the map, the games for it are shown. This would also help with the issue of "stranded" games, like "Ozteas 1941 Global Setup" that is not grouped with the other games of the same map, all starting as "World War II Global". Currently keeping stuff together merely relies on mapmakers taking care of having all games' names for the same map starting similarly (you usually want your mod to be featured next to the original, so people may actually notice it easily, obviously).

[tvleavitt]

I'd say the problem is that you were just prompted to download a "Map", so,
logically, you would expect to see an option to choose it in the interface.

Maybe the interface should group "Games" by their associated map?

Maybe the "Map Download" interface should list associated games, not just
in the map description, and make it clear that you're downloading multiple
"games" with a particular map?

It's also somewhat confusing that the maps are grouped by categories, but
when you click "Select Map", you get a monolithic list of "Games".

Also, and this is venturing off-topic, but there's no clear way of
understanding which maps are "maintained", and not, and when they were last
updated... I glanced at the documentation for Global 1940 Second Edition,
and I kind of suspect that the "Disclaimer" section is out of date... and
it refers to the forums at TripleAWarClub.org.

...and the web site doesn't group maps by category, but lists "BEST, GOOD,
and EXPERIMENTAL" (in contrast to Download Maps using "High Quality, Good
Quality, Experimental".

Thomas

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:22 PM Cernelius [e-mail] wrote:

@Cernelius https://github.com/Cernelius Ah, I see. I had not previously
noticed this. So, there's not a one for one correlation between "Maps" as
downloads, and "Games" as listed when you hit the "Select Map" button
(which is not what you're actually doing, or rather, you are, but as a side
effect of picking a "Game", rather confusing).

In 1.8.0.9 and as far back as I remember, that button was (correctly)
called "Choose Game" (you can still download 1.8.0.9, if you are curious).
Only a few years ago this was changed to the current partial nonsense of
having a "Select Map" button that open a "Select a Game" window with a list
of "Games". Yes, I already complained about this change, to no effect. That
button should be called "Select a Game", not "Select Map".

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/6994#issuecomment-652740976,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABB5HAPJZJCOVW6EJFLDUMTRZPVPVANCNFSM4ONYUQSA
.

--
Thomas Leavitt
Internet enabled since 1990

[Cernelius]

...and the web site doesn't group maps by category, but lists "BEST, GOOD, and EXPERIMENTAL" (in contrast to Download Maps using "High Quality, Good Quality, Experimental".

This is annoying to me too. I'm not sure if this is the result of having changed names and forgetting to change them in all places or, for some reasons, it was preferred having different names.

[tvleavitt]

Also off-topic, but I just realized that we have no policy requiring that a
map be distributed with a license specifying how copyright is to be
handled... and I'd say that in a number of cases, names violate trademarks
and could create problems for us. The only thread to even begin to address
the copyright / license issue on the forums, "Etiquette Question Concerning
Maps" dates from 2018 and is inconclusive. I strongly feel that this is bad
to have be ambiguous, and we should require that a license be specified
(and recommend a preferred one, Creative Commons whatever for example).
Where's the appropriate place to discuss this?

Thomas

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:45 PM Thomas Leavitt [e-mail]
wrote:

I'd say the problem is that you were just prompted to download a "Map",
so, logically, you would expect to see an option to choose it in the
interface.

Maybe the interface should group "Games" by their associated map?

Maybe the "Map Download" interface should list associated games, not just
in the map description, and make it clear that you're downloading multiple
"games" with a particular map?

It's also somewhat confusing that the maps are grouped by categories, but
when you click "Select Map", you get a monolithic list of "Games".

Also, and this is venturing off-topic, but there's no clear way of
understanding which maps are "maintained", and not, and when they were last
updated... I glanced at the documentation for Global 1940 Second Edition,
and I kind of suspect that the "Disclaimer" section is out of date... and
it refers to the forums at TripleAWarClub.org.

...and the web site doesn't group maps by category, but lists "BEST, GOOD,
and EXPERIMENTAL" (in contrast to Download Maps using "High Quality, Good
Quality, Experimental".

Thomas

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:22 PM Cernelius [e-mail] wrote:

@Cernelius https://github.com/Cernelius Ah, I see. I had not
previously noticed this. So, there's not a one for one correlation between
"Maps" as downloads, and "Games" as listed when you hit the "Select Map"
button (which is not what you're actually doing, or rather, you are, but as
a side effect of picking a "Game", rather confusing).

In 1.8.0.9 and as far back as I remember, that button was (correctly)
called "Choose Game" (you can still download 1.8.0.9, if you are curious).
Only a few years ago this was changed to the current partial nonsense of
having a "Select Map" button that open a "Select a Game" window with a list
of "Games". Yes, I already complained about this change, to no effect. That
button should be called "Select a Game", not "Select Map".

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/6994#issuecomment-652740976,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABB5HAPJZJCOVW6EJFLDUMTRZPVPVANCNFSM4ONYUQSA
.

--
Thomas Leavitt
Internet enabled since 1990

--
Thomas Leavitt
Internet enabled since 1990

[tvleavitt]

I ask this, because even "fixing" a map in the repositories can be
theoretically problematic without this, let alone updating it separately
(such as, for example, playing with the "Elemental Forces" map, so that the
player names are not prefaced with AI_, or updating the documentation on
Global 1940).

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:01 PM Thomas Leavitt [e-mail]
wrote:

Also off-topic, but I just realized that we have no policy requiring that
a map be distributed with a license specifying how copyright is to be
handled... and I'd say that in a number of cases, names violate trademarks
and could create problems for us. The only thread to even begin to address
the copyright / license issue on the forums, "Etiquette Question Concerning
Maps" dates from 2018 and is inconclusive. I strongly feel that this is bad
to have be ambiguous, and we should require that a license be specified
(and recommend a preferred one, Creative Commons whatever for example).
Where's the appropriate place to discuss this?

Thomas

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:45 PM Thomas Leavitt [e-mail]
wrote:

I'd say the problem is that you were just prompted to download a "Map",
so, logically, you would expect to see an option to choose it in the
interface.

Maybe the interface should group "Games" by their associated map?

Maybe the "Map Download" interface should list associated games, not just
in the map description, and make it clear that you're downloading multiple
"games" with a particular map?

It's also somewhat confusing that the maps are grouped by categories, but
when you click "Select Map", you get a monolithic list of "Games".

Also, and this is venturing off-topic, but there's no clear way of
understanding which maps are "maintained", and not, and when they were last
updated... I glanced at the documentation for Global 1940 Second Edition,
and I kind of suspect that the "Disclaimer" section is out of date... and
it refers to the forums at TripleAWarClub.org.

...and the web site doesn't group maps by category, but lists "BEST,
GOOD, and EXPERIMENTAL" (in contrast to Download Maps using "High Quality,
Good Quality, Experimental".

Thomas

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:22 PM Cernelius [e-mail]
wrote:

@Cernelius https://github.com/Cernelius Ah, I see. I had not
previously noticed this. So, there's not a one for one correlation between
"Maps" as downloads, and "Games" as listed when you hit the "Select Map"
button (which is not what you're actually doing, or rather, you are, but as
a side effect of picking a "Game", rather confusing).

In 1.8.0.9 and as far back as I remember, that button was (correctly)
called "Choose Game" (you can still download 1.8.0.9, if you are curious).
Only a few years ago this was changed to the current partial nonsense of
having a "Select Map" button that open a "Select a Game" window with a list
of "Games". Yes, I already complained about this change, to no effect. That
button should be called "Select a Game", not "Select Map".

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/6994#issuecomment-652740976,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABB5HAPJZJCOVW6EJFLDUMTRZPVPVANCNFSM4ONYUQSA
.

--
Thomas Leavitt
Internet enabled since 1990

--
Thomas Leavitt
Internet enabled since 1990

--
Thomas Leavitt
Internet enabled since 1990

[DanVanAtta]

A new issue would be excellent to discuss map licensing. They would need to
be GPLv3 or creative commons I'd think. A signing process similar to the
auto-signer we have for the code perhaps is a good way to manage it

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020, 8:08 PM Thomas Leavitt [e-mail]
wrote:

I ask this, because even "fixing" a map in the repositories can be
theoretically problematic without this, let alone updating it separately
(such as, for example, playing with the "Elemental Forces" map, so that the
player names are not prefaced with AI_, or updating the documentation on
Global 1940).

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:01 PM Thomas Leavitt [e-mail]
wrote:

Also off-topic, but I just realized that we have no policy requiring that
a map be distributed with a license specifying how copyright is to be
handled... and I'd say that in a number of cases, names violate
trademarks
and could create problems for us. The only thread to even begin to
address
the copyright / license issue on the forums, "Etiquette Question
Concerning
Maps" dates from 2018 and is inconclusive. I strongly feel that this is
bad
to have be ambiguous, and we should require that a license be specified
(and recommend a preferred one, Creative Commons whatever for example).
Where's the appropriate place to discuss this?

Thomas

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:45 PM Thomas Leavitt [e-mail]
wrote:

I'd say the problem is that you were just prompted to download a "Map",
so, logically, you would expect to see an option to choose it in the
interface.

Maybe the interface should group "Games" by their associated map?

Maybe the "Map Download" interface should list associated games, not
just
in the map description, and make it clear that you're downloading
multiple
"games" with a particular map?

It's also somewhat confusing that the maps are grouped by categories,
but
when you click "Select Map", you get a monolithic list of "Games".

Also, and this is venturing off-topic, but there's no clear way of
understanding which maps are "maintained", and not, and when they were
last
updated... I glanced at the documentation for Global 1940 Second
Edition,
and I kind of suspect that the "Disclaimer" section is out of date...
and
it refers to the forums at TripleAWarClub.org.

...and the web site doesn't group maps by category, but lists "BEST,
GOOD, and EXPERIMENTAL" (in contrast to Download Maps using "High
Quality,
Good Quality, Experimental".

Thomas

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:22 PM Cernelius [e-mail]
wrote:

@Cernelius https://github.com/Cernelius Ah, I see. I had not
previously noticed this. So, there's not a one for one correlation
between
"Maps" as downloads, and "Games" as listed when you hit the "Select
Map"
button (which is not what you're actually doing, or rather, you are,
but as
a side effect of picking a "Game", rather confusing).

In 1.8.0.9 and as far back as I remember, that button was (correctly)
called "Choose Game" (you can still download 1.8.0.9, if you are
curious).
Only a few years ago this was changed to the current partial nonsense
of
having a "Select Map" button that open a "Select a Game" window with a
list
of "Games". Yes, I already complained about this change, to no effect.
That
button should be called "Select a Game", not "Select Map".

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/6994#issuecomment-652740976
,
or unsubscribe
<
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABB5HAPJZJCOVW6EJFLDUMTRZPVPVANCNFSM4ONYUQSA

.

--
Thomas Leavitt
Internet enabled since 1990

--
Thomas Leavitt
Internet enabled since 1990

--
Thomas Leavitt
Internet enabled since 1990

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/6994#issuecomment-652754116,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC6SZOJIW2LK7XUFQTQOEVTRZP2ZVANCNFSM4ONYUQSA
.

[Cernelius]

For anyone who might not know, however, I should say that this map and game differentiation, as I often use it, was not frequently used by anyone else, also before GitHub times.

What I believe most persons were doing was just to call out the maps, and, with this, referring both to the map itself and the "main" game offered by the map. This way, the term "map" was often (and with prevalence) used actually to refer to the "main" game of the map, instead of ever calling it "game".

For maps having multiple games, it was common to refer to the "main" game as the "map" (as said), while any other games, using the same skin, were referred to as "mods".

However, I didn't and don't feel comfortable using such terminology, because, as far as I know, there is absolutely nothing within the map folder itself that allows me to identify which one amongst the games of the map is the "main" one (so that I may call it just "map") and, conversely, there is nothing that allows me to identify what is a "mod" of what. The fact that this might be obvious in most cases is, in my opinion, not a good argument, as something is good enough only if it is fully reliable. This is why I prefer talking in terms of maps and games, instead of in terms of maps and mods (as most other persons used to, instead).

Of course, this is merely my recollection, so be sure to contact one or more developers that were active within the community from 2010 onwards, if you want to have a more reliable picture of what used to be the prevailing terminology.

[FrostionAAA]

I really can't see what the problem is with the definitions game and maps. I would guess that most people see TripleA + A&A as "games" with a set of general rules and play .... and TripleA maps + different A&A editions and game boards as variations of the base game(s).

Not using these basic definitions could lead to confusing in IMHO.

Also, of course a person can deliberately choose to see it as weird that you "play a game of TripleA" / "join a game in TripleA" when you are actually (or also) playing a map or joining in on a specific map. But this is not a TripleA specific terms issue. This I guess is just because when you are running/playing a map of any any game, you are also "playing that game". Just like you would normally "fight" when you are in a "fight", even though it is an action and the other is a thing going on.

[DanVanAtta]

@FrostionAAA see problem statement in: https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/issues/6994#issuecomment-652714049

To expound, the average player does not think about 'games', they do not realize they are selecting XMLs (so-called games) within maps. An average player is downloading maps, and is starting a game on a map. A map is something you download and select to start a game on. A game is started, saved, and loaded.

Hence, the definition of a map and game used under the hood does not match the common definition a player would have. It's an example where coding details leaked out, what's worse is the definitions the code uses does not match the common ones used by players nor is the definition even consistent under the hood.

[DanVanAtta]

I think the way to resolve this issue is to agree on definitions per context:

Map Making & XMLs

Keep the definitions. Map is a bundle containing XMLs (all but the game-XMLs) & graphics. A game is a 'game-XML', each one is a game-scenario that can be started and played.

Players / Front-End

Perhaps it's simplest for map-maker games and maps to just be called the same thing, maps. If you 'download a map', the fact that you can get more than one in a single download is perhaps just not important. IE: you might be downloading a map and a collection of map-mods.

Then, a game is a '.tsvg' file, it is something you can save and load.

With this you can say:

• "Select a map"
• "We have a game going"
• "We'd like to play on this map"
• "We'd like to start a game on this map"
• "We have a game started on that map".

Note, if game == XML, then "we have a game going" does not make sense. You can't make a XML "go" it's incomplete without the map. Also, starting a game on "map" does not make sense under the map maker definition since the two are mutually exclusive entities, a map is the bundle of map items minus the game XMLs.

[Cernelius]

I think it is just to invite confusion to have different definitions for users and map makers or developers.

Besides, although I may be easily biased by my knowledge difference on the matter, I can easily imagine normal users not seeing normal Revised as a different map than Revised LHTR or the 1940 and 1942 games of Global as different maps. In the first case, we have two different rulesets for the same map (and I'm pretty sure this should be clear to any informed regular user, as well) and, in the second case, we have two different scenarios (but the same ruleset) for the same map. Since we cannot know what we are going to change when we make a different game for the same map (we may change the set of rules or other elements, and I don't believe we are even clear about what is the set of rules, anyway), I cannot think of a better definition for it but "game" and, even if there would be one, I don't think it would be reasonable or even feasible to face the problems related to changing it (updating every documentiation mentioning it and so on).

So I still believe that the "map" and "game" concept should be kept separate and correctly referenced in every case (for example, changing "Select Map" back to "Choose Game" or to something like "Select a Game", as long as the thing you get to select is called as such).

However called, I believe "map" and "game" should not be called the same, especially if there is not a clear way to identify the "main" game of a map having two or more.

[DanVanAtta]

I think it is just to invite confusion to have different definitions for users and map makers or developers.

I'm afraid we're already there. The term is 'domain terminology'. It's not always a good idea to create unique names when different people use the same name in different ways. Telling someone, "no, use this name" instead just doesn't really work (it tends to create aliases instead of removing terms and creates confusion since a person uses what they think is a name and you have to constantly "correct" them).

In practice, when you are talking about game XMLs, we can easily have a defined terminology. Then when you get to the game UI, we keep terms that players actually use.

In any other case, the phrases I outlined would have different meanings and/or would be nonsensical. If we stick to map maker terms, then "starting a game on a map" is nonsensical, even "loading a game" would mean something other than what you think (it would mean selecting a game from XML, rather than loading a game from .tsvg file).

So I still believe that the "map" and "game" concept should be kept separate and correctly referenced in every case

Again, I'm afraid that is just a losing battle. We can correctly reference the terms if we are in a XML context and within a map-maker discussion, but go beyond that and try as hard as you can, "yellow" will always be "yellow" and it won't be "sun-color" as much as you want to correct people. Or, you can get people to say "sun-color" instead of "yellow", but they'll still say "yellow".

EG: "this map is broken" will always be a phrase. In reality that is either a nonsense statement or a tautology since you can only play a game, not a map.

However called, I believe "map" and "game" should not be called the same, especially if there is not a clear way to identify the "main" game of a map having two or more.

The idea is that we go ahead and honor that the format on hard disk of a map is transparent to users. After they download a "map", the fact that we call each game a "Map" is okay. The user just does not care that it's coming from the same folder. When a user is selecting a game, to them it is just as well if each game is in its own map. The fact that is not the case is a detail that map makers and the engine cares about, the player does not. To a player, when selecting games, they may as well be in their own map folder with duplicate assets. Hence, to them, they are selecting a map that they downloaded (and the fact they can download many maps at once when they selected one map is a casualty of our poor UX).

[DanVanAtta]

Re: multiple meanings

The concept that address this is called "domain driven design"

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-driven_design
• https://martinfowler.com/tags/domain%20driven%20design.html

We have at play two bounded contexts here, map-making and the front-end UI for selecting games. Essentially in each bounded context you have a single vocabulary that has a well defined meaning in that context. For example the word "transfer", talk to a banker and it means a money transfer, but in a sports context it could mean the opposing team now has the ball. The same word, different meanings based on context & domain.

TripleA is a complex code base and struggles with this for many different topics. The word "player" has multiple meanings, an attachment does as well. Is an attachment the XML entity, or is it the parsed entity that is active in the code?

TripleA being an old code base is before the concept of Domain Driven Design (DDD) even came out. TripleA has tried to invent unique terminology for any entity it wishes to name, which has proven to be a losing battle. We've had the same issue with the badly named "player" entity. In the business domain, a player is a person, not a faction or a side you choose. In the map-making/XML context, a player is a faction that you can choose. The game-engine tried to solve this non-uniqueness of names problems by inventing a new term in other contexts called a "Node". So instead of players, the game engine has the nonsense term "node" to refer to a player (which might be human or AI). A "Node" then controls multiple Players.

If we apply domain driven design properly, then we make it clear when you are in which context and we are left with a clear glossary of what means what in each context. Ideally then as part of DDD is you use the terms that the 'domain experts' would use so there is no translation of "player to node" being done, everyone is using the same vocabularly.

Thus, when players say, "select a map" instead of "select a game", and "save a game", you then use those terms and don't forces players to say "select a game", nor "save a game-save". If a player says "load a game", it should mean what they mean, you are loading a ".tsvg" file and not a "XML". If you want to force them to use the same terms consistnently, then it would be "load a game-save", but again, that is a losing battle.

DDD has proven to be a really valuable methodology. Bottom line, focus on defining domains, identify what terms the domain experts use in that domain, and then create a clear meaning for those terms. For example, when dealing with map-XML, we can forget players exist and just focus on the map-maker terms and the XML.

[Cernelius]

I see no good reason for calling all games as maps in the moment they can be all called as games, instead. Calling all games as games has the advantage of avoiding having to wonder every time if someone is using one terminology or the other one and it is consistent the most with the fact that we say "save game" and not "save map", a "saved game" being a game in progress (with a "history"), as opposed to a "new game" being a game not yet started (with no "history"). The "saved game" is the "tsvg" file and the "new game" is the xml file.

In my mind-speculating, normal users are more likely to see two games of two identical maps as two games of the same map rather than seeing two games of the same map as two different maps.

[DanVanAtta]

A "new game" is more than the XML as it contains components from the map. Starting a game and saving immediately will encode more data than just what is in the XML. To players a map is just something they select and it comes with default rules (so it encompasses part of the XML).

Hence, to players:

• a game is the XML and more
• a map is part of the XML and more

The terminology as-is is just fatally flawed. If we take this consistent terminology to an extreme and say it does not matter what language players use, the game engine wins, then we should say "Welcome all nodes to the lobby!" instead of saying "Welcome all players to the lobby!" and say "How many more nodes do you need to start?" rather than saying "how many more players do you need to start?"

To the extent of naming, it's difficult, and the game engine would maybe have done better to call a 'game' a 'game-XML' or perhaps called it a 'rules-XML'. A map probably would have been better called a 'map-bundle'. This would have avoided overlap with terms that players use, and use with different meaning.

Hence, to players, a "game" is a map with a default rules selection. Selecting a game and selecting a map are essentially the same thing with exception that a game selection can be of a new game or an existing.

The key distinction is really that a map comes with default rules, the rules and the map are tied together. If I have a map called Big World, and another called Big World V3, what does it matter if it came from one download or two? Do you have to really correct someone and tell them that there is no Big World map, that Pact of Steel is not a map? If we go by the strict game-engine/map-maker terminology, the question "which maps do you play?" is nonsensical since you cannot play a map. To my point, an actual answer to "which maps do you play" could be "Big World" and "Big World v3" (with the only difference being the default rule-set, IE: the game-XML). Similarly, "joining a game" is meaningful (whether started or in staging), "Joining a map" is not. A map is just a selection that comes with default rules (to players).

If we are forcing players to be aware of how the files look on disk then we are really forcing them to know game details that they generally don't care about and don't want to care about. If we insist on correcting the terminology they use, it's a losing battle. While players can often interchange "map" and "game", forcing the specific game engine meaning that is flawed in all cases is also a losing battle that is not really helpful.

I suppose this gets to a final point, which was perhaps not worth as much effort as we expended, the game-engine chose flawed terms with slightly different meanings compared to the terms players use. They just mean slightly different things depending on audience.

[DanVanAtta]

I'd like to put a pin in this conversation.

Forward leaning, removing the map_name XML attribute (or at least its usage so it would no longer be used) would be a good thing:

• one less thing to worry about
• one less thing to get wrong
• it should not be needed, the game engine should be smart enough to know the map folder or map zip where it is reading a game XML file.

I think we can either fully qualify 'game' to be "game XML file" or call it a "map file". A "game", or "loading a game" is more clear if it that only refers to loading a tsvg file. Note that this terminology does get confusing as the game engine does have to deal with the concept of 'saving' and 'loading a game'. Because there is a map-maker, the 'save' is not clear, and the 'load' is also not clear which type of item we are loading.

So, for terms, I think these are the right ones:

• map folder
• map zip
• map file (.xml)
• game file (.tsvg)

If we say "map file", there is never ambiguity. If we say 'game', there will be, but we are no worse off (and context clues will be important).

[Cernelius]

@DanVanAtta For what is worth, this is an example of you asking which game of the "world_war_ii_global" map (what appears to be) a regular user was referring to.

(00:51:56) LaFayette: Ghost, which version of global did we just play?
(00:52:36) Ghost358th: 2nd edition
(00:52:58) LaFayette: any chance, do you know if it's just that version, or all of them with the problem?
(00:53:15) Ghost358th: not sure
(00:54:19) Desert_Admiral: i think its all versions having problems
(00:54:26) Desert_Admiral: someone mentioned civil war had problems
(00:54:35) Ghost358th: I am guessing all, cause nobody is playing Balanced, which we would if 2nd edition was not working

You didn't ask "which game of global", which would be our terminology, but you didn't ask "which map (file) of global", either. I find calling the games as versions, instead of as maps, more agreeable, but here there is the problem that the word "version" is already taken, as it is numerically specified for each game.

Strictly, since by "global" you meant the map, not any game, your question was nonsensical from a mapmaker standpoint, since the map currently has no versioning, while, if the user would have understood map as game, then he should have answered your question with "4" or "4.0.0" (which is the latest version of the Global 1940 2nd Edition game), instead of "2nd edition".

However, looks like that the user immediately and correctly understood what you wanted to be answered (even though he didn't specify the game clearly, as there is more than one "2nd Edition" game of global).

The conclusion is that calling the "games" as "versions" seems to work fine for regular users.

[DanVanAtta]

I think 'version' was used short for 'map version' in that context. Perhaps 'map file' and 'map version' and 'map variant' are all synonymous? Would there be any confusion between those?

On a side-note, I feel pretty happy regarding your astute observation @Cernelius . I believe that is the right exercise for us to decide on terms. By listening to "natural" conversations and adopting the same vocabulary, we cut out a translation layer and improve the clarity and accuracy of the vocubarly we use. :+1: Having no translation layer between the code, developers, map makers, and players, all using a well known language that all means the same thing is just going to make things easier for everyone.

[Cernelius]

I think 'version' was used short for 'map version' in that context. Perhaps 'map file' and 'map version' and 'map variant' are all synonymous? Would there be any confusion between those?

I think that if you would have asked "which map file of global did we just play?", the user would have just asked you what you mean. Myself, if you say "map file", I would understand you are asking about whatever "file" of a map (I would agree that the game file is a map file, as well). If you would say "map xml" I would immediately and surely understand what you say, but that is not a good definition, since only persons that know that the game files are the only ones in xml format would understand it and the games file don't have to be in xml format, as far as I know (maybe in the future they will be in some other format).

"Variant", just like "modification" (mod), would imply that there is something the game is a variant of (and there is currently nothing that specifies which one of the games of the same map is the "original" one), and would make no sense for maps each of which has 1 single game (with no variants of any kind of it ever made).

[DanVanAtta]

I think we are getting to the heart of the issue @Cernelius . The way the maps are structured is transparent to a user. To them, if it's one XML, something else, they don't really know nor necessarily care of know any different. Meanwhile, those details are important to map makers and development.

I'd probably agree 'map file' is ambiguous, it could really be any file within a map.