Understanding loggable requires examining multiple perspectives and considerations. orthography - Why is it "loggable" rather than "logable"? I am using ' loggable ' in the name of an interface written in a .NET programming language. It is among the many words that make sense in a programming context but aren't (yet) listed in English Dictionaries, as are serializable, deserialization, and multiton.
Loggable seems like the correct spelling to me, but I can't pinpoint the reason. Additionally, similar words such as floggable and taggable have ... meaning - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange. Similarly, loggable has a bit longer story as shown in Ngram.
As suggested here usage appears to prefer the double consonant. "Most people here will tell you that there are no concrete rules in English. But as a rule of thumb, for words ending with a single consonant, if the suffix begins with a vowel, then the afore-noted consonant is doubled. A word for a "non-logged in" user.
This is a rather strange context - but so far as I can see, it doesn't actually make any difference who created the document anyway, so it's irrelevant whether that specific individual is logged in or not. If user A created the doc, and user B subsequently logged in and "claimed" it, it's probably of no consequence to user C whether A is logged in. Surely all that matters is whether anyone (A ... How did 'sluice' evolve to have 2 distinct meanings?.
What explains this word's opposing meanings? Can they be conciliated? I already understand and so ask NOT about the definition, below which I want to burrow. I heed the Etymological Fallacy.
📝 Summary
Essential insights from this discussion on loggable demonstrate the relevance of being aware of this subject. By using this knowledge, one can achieve better results.