Training and Development for Drupal

Vindicated by History (maybe)

About two years ago, I filed a common complaint about the muddiness of Drupal's terminology. So that blog post was addressing the lack of clarity of terms like story/page/post/content and some other things like the "content construction kit" that doesn't actually make content. As a trainer I get to explain these terms over and over again.

Well, I was thinking back to that post while perusing the admin menus of Drupal 7 and I was pleased to see some of the changes (for the better) that have been implemented since May 2008. I noticed that the "Story" content type is now called "Article", CCK's port into core is now called Fields, and even the area that was called "User Management" is being called "People" which was a thought I suggested that earned me a hearty scoffing. That's fine, I've gotten used to taking a little heat as one of those guys that works at the intersection between developers and other people, but I feel relieved that these terms will make it easier for my trainees gel their understanding of the concepts.

No doubt the people joining the Drupal project now can thank all the usability testing that the Drupal Association facilitated, as well as the influence of the D7UX effort, for not having to suffer through some muddy times.

Of course, there are new terms to use and learn - like the difference between "Entities" and "Bundles" in the Fields API. Let's see how my students approach that vocabulary on May 24.


People sounds very pedestrian. Very "Microsoft"

Drupal aside, as a system admin, does this mean I have to ask someone what their "people ID" is?
Or, "What is your people login?"
Were trying to login as a people, or an administrator? ( I suppose it makes sense to separate
administrators from people.)
I hope this one doesn't it make it into Solaris. Thank you very much.

By the way, yes, there are functional ID's which are not people. Many in fact.


Are there ever non-humans who hold accounts? Of not then people is 100% accurate.

I concur; "people" is too general a term, whereas "user" is unambiguous and accurate. However there's no need for foul language.

Do you have any argument, out of "I don't like it"?

Me, I do:
- user refers to people coming to this site, whatever their role (anonymous included)
- people is a bit vague but from the ground is more appealing than the austere word "user". I don't much difference in the signifier, but I see and important and positive difference in the signifier (google for signifier and signified ( if you don't know what it means).

I'm with you.

people fucking sucks. user is better

The data structure that grants permissions to account holders is still called a "user". But the admin layout once known as "user management" has been renamed "people". I am sure it was not an arbitrary decision, this probably ran the gauntlet of many people in the Drupal project. And there it is baked right into core's overlay feature:

I had nothing to do with that change, so make sure to aim your foul language at the right blog next time.

People is still a loathsome term for users. Using a wrong term and telling me it's better because some idiot thinks user means druggie is fucking retarded.

Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

Most Recent Screencast

See video

Support the Association