The Academy Software Foundation has released an updated inclusive language guide which takes aim at some ‘problematic’ but common coding terms.

The guide aims to replace exclusionary or offensive language in coding and documentation, but also general language often used in corporate or business settings.

In conjunction with the Alliance for OpenUSD (AOUSD), the guide attempts to increase awareness and provide a base for teams to start integrating more inclusive language in their practices and documentation.

The guide relies first on old, more obvious examples of terms to avoid, referencing master, slave, as major no-nos. Further, it says that black and white should not be used to denote negative or positive characteristics, but rather just reflect physical colours.

Coders should also stay away from using ‘native’ or ‘powow’, and are urged to replace ‘culture fit’ with ‘values fit’. ‘Housekeeping’ was also deemed as inappropriate.

The guide also references gendered language, such as ‘man hours’, ‘manpower’, and ‘middleman’. It also references gendered group terms to avoid, such as referring to a group of people as ‘guys’, referring to women as ‘girls’, or using gendered pronouns when gender neutral pronouns would suffice.

It also referenced ablest language, such as ‘abnormal’, ‘sanity check’, and ‘dummy’, as well as ageist language, such as ‘grandfathering’ and ‘legacy’, to avoid.

Recommended reading

• Comment: The End of DEI in the US Cannot Follow Suit in the UK – Here’s Why
• Tech Giants Reconsider DEI Ahead of Trump Inauguration
• Google Scraps DEI Language from Responsible AI Page

Interestingly, the guide is coming after some commonly used terms and phrases, labelling them as violent. While ‘crushing it’ and ‘killing it’, as well as ‘hung’ do reference violent acts, they are generally not thought of as violent in common conversation.

Among these specific call outs, the updated reference also provides some general guidance to teams. They include avoiding terms that have a social history that may be sensitive to certain ethnicities or nationalities, and avoiding idioms or jargons that may exclude some people with different backgrounds.

Providing inclusive examples, with varied names, genders, and a lack of cultural-specifications is also recommended to keep things more inclusive.