SBVR_ — use of 'designation', definition of 'term'

A quick search of the Final Adopted Specification shows that the terms 'term' and 'symbol' are consistently used to mean 'signifier'. This view is clearly outlined in Annex A.3.4:
SBVR supports mapping of business meaning to concrete language by associating elements of the body of shared meanings with signifiers, e.g., terms such as “customer”, “car”, “branch” for concepts, and fact symbols (often verb phrases) such as “rents”, “is located at” for fact types. Logical formulations provide the structure, and signifiers are placed in logical formulations to provide the expression.

So what Don meant was that a "fact symbol" is an expression that means a fact type. Note please that
an expression that means a fact type
and
the representation of a fact type by an expression
are lingustically entirely different things. The first is a noun concept that refers to a thing characterized by its use. The second is a noun concept that refers to a state of affairs – a relationship – that involves two kinds of thing. The second is a nominalization (gerund) of
expression represents fact type

In ISO, in the NODE, and in Merriam-Webster, 'term' is defined to be an expression or a sign, whereas (in M-W) 'designation' (4) is the relationship and 'designation' (3) is the expression.

It was my perception (when I reviewed the penultimate revised proposal for SBVR) that 'representation' and 'designation' are consistently used in SBVR to mean the relationship of expression to meaning, rather than the expression itself. A quick search reveals the following possibly inconsistent usages:

In Table

Under 'form of expression' several Examples speak of "the designation 'rents'" and others, and the Note refers to forms of expression involving designations.

'placeholder' is said to be a representation (relationship) but it has a "starting character position". This appears to be assigning the attribute to the wrong object. It is rather the (sub-)expression of the placeholder that has the starting character position.

In 'placeholder uses designation', the Synonymous Form should probably be "is used by" or "is used in" rather than "is used for".

Under 'role namespace', "a designation ... is typically a role" is clearly wrong. And "a designation ... can be for a characteristic" should be "can designate". And "the designation 'assigned'", etc., is inconsistent.

Under 'integer', "designations for all of the integers" should be "designations of ..."

In the introduction to Clause 9, "designations like 'rental' ... are used to refer to concepts" seems also to mean the thing and not the relationship.

In 11.2.1, symbol and all of its subtypes are said to be representations, and that might be made consistent with the SBVR definition with enough weasel wording, but it is completely at odds with the terminology of linguistics and semiotics, and the DictionaryBasis confirms that: "a thing representing ..."

This issue is resolved by the resolution to issue 9952.