Maybe outdated was not a good term to use, but they are a simplification of what is now a complex event. It seems as the complexity of identifying the source of heat, the first fuel ignited, and then developing a scenario that brought the two together has developed, it has become harder to fit the classification into a one word explanation. I agree the ability to communicate our thoughts in venues such as this help all understand what is being perceived by other when specific terminology is being used. The willingness to be open and accept other’s comments is always helpful to one’s growth in his or her profession. I do not think any of the words being used in the classification matters to any great deal if there is no litigation. Where the terminology is important is when you are asking others, outside the profession, to understanding you point of view on a subject. If the information we are disseminating is not clear than there is a problem. The whole purpose of communication is to accurately relate your ideas on a subject to others. Where the terminology being used by both the private and public sector matters, is that it must also be understood by the general public. If I were to tell a lay person that I have conclude the that the cause of this fire is undetermined but I believe it is accidental in nature so I am classifying it undetermined accidental what would that person think of me as a professional? I know what I though the first time I heard some one use that terminology and I am part of the same profession.

As to consistencies between reporting agencies I agree that may not be the whole problem, but like it are not these are nationally recognized descriptions for investigators from the fire service to use when determining the origin and causes of fires. There will be times that wording will be compared to what we use. If a profession can not agree on something a simple as terminology can you trust other information from that professin as being accruate? In the public sector, it seems these terms are only being used in these report. Unless we are saying there is a separation within the fire investigation community, how does one address the inconsistencies in terminology?