What problem does this address?

With the upcoming full site editing, all the different block manipulations are going to become a handfull. The user experience may risk becoming somewhat fuzzy, because of the naming convention.

What we have now:

• Reusable (synced) block
• Block-style
• Block-variation
• Block-pattern
• Block-template (soon)
• Block-template-part (soon)

What is unclear?

When does it stop being a block and become a template part? Isn't everything a template-part? Isn't everything a block? What is the difference between a template part and a template block?

What is your proposed solution?

Proposal:

I think there should be a naming convention that makes a clear distinction between 'block manipulations' and 'template parts'.

Something along these lines:

Blocks

• Block-style
• Block-variation
• Reusables

Template (full site editing)

• Template-block (formerly block-template)
• Template-block-part (formerly block-template-part)
• Template-block-pattern (formerly block-pattern)

Reasoning:

It being a 'block' is an abstract meaning; everything is a block, or a block with other blocks inside it. We should beware of naming everything a block+{...} because it becomes obtuse.

For example:

A template-block has a clear meaning: it is a block that is used in a template. And a couple template blocks form a template.

Yet, block-template has a more fuzzy meaning: If i didnt know, I'd asssume from its name that it is a template for an individual block!

Block-pattern is not as confusing, as its purpose is to make patterns (which aren't that dissimilar from template-parts). I would call it a template-block-pattern, but it is an edge case.

Future
I suppose eventually we will drop the whole block terminology as there will be no need to make distinctions between template-parts and block-template-parts.