Terminology change from original article is more confusing than in the article

[strazto]

Hi there, I'm keen to use this plugin, but the terminology that you've changed from the original article does make the process less clear.

In particular:

• Source Armature: The armature you want to have animation on it

• I take this to mean - this is the armature you don't have animations for, but want to apply animations from the source

This is the main thing that bothers me "Source" implies that this armature is some kind of input, and this doesn't really match up with its intended purpose.

I can see why "Target" armature could go either way (Are we targeting it for input or output?) and this may also be confusing, however, in conjunction with a clear idea of the corresponding input, it wouldn't be a problem.

Perhaps a better convention could be

• "Master": the rig that's already animated
• "Puppet": the rig we wish to animate

[Arisego]

Thanks for your advice, I apologize for the confusing names I choose. As I am not a native English speaker, its a bit difficult for me to choose a precise word for a variable, so I just pickup the first word appear in my head. The armature which needs animation is called "source" is just because while I program this, that armature belongs to me, and the animated armature comes from others. I will try to re-organize terminologies in code and docs while I got some time to work on this project again.

[strazto]

Might add a PR for this, and tidy up some of the other strings if I get time.

Thanks for understanding, and great work on the plugin