I knew that I wouldn't be the only researcher facing these questions! ;-)
However, I was also thinking that the forum here gives us a unique opportunity to do some standardisation.
The shortcomings of previous attempts are rooted in the fact that a single author with a single approach ends up very specific in some areas whilst omitting others entirely.
Their own bias creeps in! For example; who decided on 'inverse baluster'? Which way is up?
and David who decides when it constitutes a 'deception' and when it's just a small portion?? LOL!
If we want to use terms like 'ogee' then we need a clear understanding of how this relates to the way the term applies in furniture.
If we make references to egg-shape or eliptical, recurve or convex, then we need to use the same vocabulary as readers and other authors.
In this forum we have the DIVERSITY of disciplines which might make the task worthwhile, and allow our collective researches to be in a more standardised and (therefore interactive )form ?!
The only audience I care about communicating with is the present company, not some 80 year old tome which is gonna be totally out of date in it's useage and context (?!)