Alternative inclusive terms for master and slave in I2S/I2C Specification

[manish1468]

Hi,

Use of inclusive language is now preferred in documentation. I2S and I2C specifications of NXP uses master and slave terms which are non-inclusive and now not preferred in documentation. I want to know if NXP is planning to change these terms with other inclusive alternatives. What are the suggestions from NXP for I2S and I2C specifications.

Thanks

[reyes · Accepted solution]

Hi,

NXP will manage especially with the two terms that causes the strongest offense: “master/slave” and “whitelist/blacklist.” Given that these terms are deeply rooted in documents, we need to be pragmatic. The idea is to focus on the future: tackling new texts and documents or those that are due for updates, rather than trying to be comprehensive and touching the many existing documents out there.

Standards organization MIPI has selected the terms “controller/target” as replacement in the case of the I2C and I3C bus that is used on many NXP products.

When there is no clear context or the context is defined by NXP, the replacements terms “leader/follower” have been selected as the default choice.

Thanks,

Jose

NXP Support

[manish1468]

Thanks Jose!