Any cellular document is a mishmash of alphabet soup: UTRAN, UMTS, PS-CN, SGSN, RNC, RNS, eNodeB, EPC, MME, S-GW, X2-AP, S1, GTP-U, HSDPA, HSUPA, RRC, PDCP, RLC, OFDM, MU-MIMO, and on and on ad infinitum.
You'd think the marketing people would at least get the public-facing stuff right, but they've likely been tainted by association with the engineers.
There's also WiFi and now WiFi 1-6 (the F is just dumb) and Bluetooth 1-5.
OFDM and MU-MIMO aren't user facing technologies, they can be applied in any wireless standard really. Just because router manufacturers put stickers on their boxes doesn't make the technology customer facing.
Same with the protocols underlying the cellular industry. For all the engineers care, the people just call it by their Gs and be done with it. Cell phone manufacturers tried to advertise with specific technology names because "3G but slightly faster" doesn't sell well. Then the 4G debacle happened where LTE didn't even qualify to be called 4G at first except due to a technicality and now that LTE Advanced is available, which finally is fast enough to be called 4G according to the specification, people are already starting to call it 5G.
I blame the marketeers for ruining any consumer facing schemes by their drive to have the biggest number the first no matter what. As long as people like that end up naming things, we'll never have concise naming schemes for consumers as all simplification efforts are ruined by trying to grab a quick buck.
Telco has nothing on the military.
We had a database of TLA's[1] that was over 11,000 strong. Also everyone knew your TLA wasn't worth a damn unless it changed every three months or so.
[1] That's a 'Three Letter Acronym' - yes, there is a TLA for TLA.
So even back then you were already than halfway though the available space. Assuming they were all unique, which they wouldn't be. :)
Back when I worked in that area our standards collection for x.400 /x.500 took up about 1/3 of a full hight cupboard