Meyer is trying to move up one level of abstraction; the `programs` he is talking about are synonymous with `specifications` so right away those words are being used in an atypical fashion.

Calling them `progspecs` would be gross and newspeak-y and calling them `program specifications` would be verbose. Regardless, the theory of these `programs` may indeed be useful.

Also, he's not saying that all relations are progspecs, but defining that progspecs are pairs of (relation, set).