Should we rename "core ontology"?

Ref: Glossary

Currently, we are using the term "core ontology" to describe a foundational, domain-independent ontology that provides a minimal set of concepts and relationships applicable across multiple domains. It serves as a common, reusable module for knowledge sharing and integration.

The term "core," in other contexts (e.g., circular factory models), also refers to a used product returned to the factory after its life cycle. This dual meaning could make communication unclear.

Questions:

• Should we consider renaming "core ontology" to avoid potential misunderstandings?
• If so, what alternative names would better reflect its role as a foundational, domain-independent, reusable module?
• How do we ensure the name is clear to newcomers without contradicting the familiarity for existing users?