RE: map-keymap doc not clear

[Drew Adams]

        The problem is that
        "binding" sometimes means the command (or keymap) that an
        event is bound to,
        and it sometimes means the pair: event plus what it's bound to.

    It is traditional to use the term "binding" in both ways.
    I don't think it is desirable to change this double usage,
    which is much broader than Emacs.

    If someone comes up with a better way to improve this doc string, we
    can use it.  Otherwise I'll install my change.

I don't object to using "binding" in both ways in general. My point is that
using it in two different ways in this doc string, without making it clear
that it is used in two different ways, leads to misunderstanding.

As Stefan pointed out, usually it is made clear from the context which
meaning is meant - that too is part of the "tradition". The problem here is
that one can easily (more naturally, in fact) read the wrong meaning. The
doc string makes perfect sense with the incorrect interpretation - that's
the problem.

IOW, the context doesn't make clear which meaning of "binding" is meant in
the first line.

Simply saying "Call FUNCTION for each event bound in KEYMAP" would make
everything clear. What's the downside of doing that?