"As for the terms for them, its a matter of splitting of irrelevant hairs. The importance is in the concept, not the label. Call them Freds for all I care."
That's fine for casual conversation but I don't think it's OK for technical books or articles.
I have a book that describes certain well-known patterns improperly. The pattern described is useful but the name is normally assigned to something else entirely. This isn't just splittuing hairs. It puts the reader at a disadvantage when conversing with others. It's hard to communicate when people don't agree on the definitions of words.