Rename 'shared load functions' to 'universal load functions'

[Rich-Harris]

Describe the problem

I'm working on some tutorial content, and finding the 'server-only load functions' and 'shared load functions' terminology a bit ugly and confusing.

Describe the proposed solution

• Server load function — +page.server.js, +layout.server.js
• Universal load function — +page.js, +layout.js

Alternatives considered

'Isomorphic' 🤮

Importance

nice to have

Additional Information

No response

[benmccann]

Shared always made sense to me. Universal seems a bit weird to me because it's like they can run on anything anywhere, but there's really only two places they're running - the client and the server - so it doesn't seem like it needs such an all encompassing name

[elliott-with-the-longest-name-on-github]

Not to be utterly controversial, but what if we just named them like we do environment variables? Public load and private load. They both follow the same semantics -- public x can be used both server-side and client-side, while private x can only be used server-side.

[avarun42]

Isomorphic seems like it has a clear definition that matches the intent of usage here, so why 🤮?

[Rich-Harris]

It's a pretentious word that means the opposite of what people in the JavaScript world want it to mean. Isomorphism describes different things that have the same form, rather than one thing adapting to multiple surfaces. It's backwards.

[Jerboas86]

what do you think about omni-side load function or all-side load function?

[lukaszpolowczyk]

@Jerboas86 In that case, I'll give another suggestion in this style: both-side. :)
Because there are only two sides, so and both-side immediately informs about it.