I would suggest that we stick with the consistent use of of
OpenACS terminology and add appropriate modifiers. For
example, an OpenACS package that has been given a wrapper
to work with dotLRN could be called a "dot-LRN-enabled"
package. In contrast, dotLRN package that has no
corresponding generic OpenACS version could be called a
"dotLRN-specific" package or perhaps simply a "dotLRN"
package. (I could imagine there being dotLRN-specific service
contracts as well.)
