[TUHS] PG3 or Gen3.0?

[segaloco via TUHS]

Received a question from Thalia Archibald concerning my use of the
nomenclature "PG3" vs Pirzada's "Gen3.0".  I pulled together the info
below, seems like it might be interesting to the broader audience:

So it's a bit fuzzy when you get into the weeds. This document[1]
defines the acronym "PG" as such:

> At the highest level in the document hierarchy is the
> Program Document (PG) Index that lists all of the documents
> associated with a program generic.  A single PG-level directory
> occupies the corresponding position in the file system hierarchy.

So within their source control structure you would have directories:

pg-1c300-01 (issue 1)
pg-1c300-02 (issue 2)

And then under those the "PR" directories containing the individual
groupings of source files, other documents, etc.

This isn't what I originally based my use of this acronym on though,
rather just Program Generic (PG).
Typically if I do see a shorter name,
the system is just referred to as a "Generic", proper noun. This was
common practice within AT&T and did not just apply to UNIX[2][3].
In fact, this first round of USG UNIX (before UNIX/TS and later) was
very "Bell-ish" compared to later efforts. The manuals were the only
ones rendered to Bell System standards in that they had the OSD headers
with document ID, issue, date, etc. rather than just the standard
manpage masthead. Several of the USG documents of the time look like
the same typesetting package used for 3ESS generic pidents for instance.

As I was gathering some of this info, I keep seeing PG-1C300 used where
the system is referred to in short.  This actually makes sense given
AT&T's use of the "PG" prefix for a number of different projects.
For instance, MERT Release 0 is given as PG-1C600[4]. COSMOS, built
on UNIX by WECo for a frame system in telco offices[5], has
documentation given as PA-6P014, possibly implying a PG-6Pxxx prefix
for the underlying generic. Outside of UNIX, PG-3H903 is one of the
3ESS generics[6].

After compiling all of that info, I'm inclined to say that the
"canonical" names in increasing length are "PG-1C300", then "Generic",
then "Program Generic". I would think given Pirzada's being at AT&T
at the time though the "Gen3.0" etc. nomenclature would also be
acceptable, just maybe not "period".

- Matt G.

P.S. As always this is just my own research, I wasn't there so I'd
certainly get some second opinions if available.

[1] - https://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/TechReports/USG_Library/1099_Program_Generic_Control_and_Documentation_on_UNIX.pdf
[2] - https://telecomarchive.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/docs/bsp-archive/233/233-154-135_I1.pdf
[3] - https://telecomarchive.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/docs/bsp-archive/234/234-090-161_I1.pdf
[4] - https://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Documentation/Manuals/MERT_Release_0/Pgs 01-02 Title Page.pdf
[5] - https://telecomarchive.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/docs/bsp-archive/SPCS/PA-6P014_I3.pdf
[6] - https://telecomarchive.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/docs/bsp-archive/SPCS/PG-3H903_I10.pdf