I've just published SRP's Vocabulary Problem: Why Every Reformulation Failed.
The Single Responsibility Principle has been criticized as vague, ambiguous, and arbitrary for thirty years. A companion paper shows it carries a demonstrable cardinality error — but that error was hiding in plain sight. Why did no one see it?
This paper answers that question. The vocabulary SRP inherited — "concern" from Dijkstra, "responsibility" from Martin — imports a cardinality assumption before any reasoning begins. The words make the right question unaskable.
📄 Read the paper: 10.5281/zenodo.20445691
📄 Companion paper: SRP Is Wrong: The Cardinality Error in the Single Responsibility Principle
