Dear Prof. Landay,

first of all, thank you for reading my article and taking the time to provide feedback. I feel very honored.

What I did here was, essentially, to write a summary of my review of the three referenced articles on design systems/languages. Therefore, I also stuck to the terminology they're using. I can absolutely understand your frustration with the fact that what's called a "simple pattern library" in my article should already contain all properties of a language, as you describe above. I believe we're looking at the famous problem of theory vs. practice here. My article summarizes an understanding of the terms as used "in the wild", which pretty much matches my own experience from industry jobs.

That being said, I totally agree that a sound theoretical foundation is invaluable for practice and terminology should be used as closely to the originally intended meaning as possible. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. I've in fact conducted proper research (not just a Medium article) on that exact topic, but for mixed reality (see my paper "What is Mixed Reality?").

Also, thank you very much for the book tips. I'll definitely dive deeper into that. :)

Best,

Max