We use cookies to provide our visitors with an optimal site experience. View our privacy notice and cookie notice to learn more about how we use cookies and how to manage your settings. By proceeding on our website you consent to the use of cookies.
The distinction is indeed with respect to the sense with which the connectors are applied and the resultant connectivity. Unfortunately, it’s a matter in which some confusion and ambiguity remains; one is best advised to check the pinout diagram on the datasheet for a part in question prior to ordering.
thats all good and well but… the description for the one ending in R states it is reversed. Yet the diagram indicates a straight pin for pin layout which is confusing.
If one considers a context where the expectation is to connect a TX on one device to an RX on another, calling a pin-reversed cable “standard” can make more sense, though such would seem backwards from the perspective of one focused on connectivity.
It’s confusing, to be certain; the bitter, brutal fact of the matter though is that it’s one of numerous points of detail on which perfection in consistency of nomenclature and product curation has yet to be achieved among all parties. Hence, the counsel to rely on the connection diagrams as the most authoritative indicator of the function of any particular cable.
Such issues are not as uncommon as one might hope, and in these cases views differ regarding whether it’s better to accept the manufacturer’s nomenclature or attempt to present information in a normalized fashion. One can be pretty much assured however that somebody, somewhere is going to disagree with whichever convention one chooses…