Does anyone else find it annoying when...

...browsing reviews for oracle card sets on Amazon (or wherever) and seeing reviewers refer to them as "tarot cards"?

I know it's a small thing, but it annoys me so much! Another one I've heard is that all oracle card decks are "angel cards"...um, what?

ebay lumps them all together, so I'm kind of used to it, but amazon should know better.

But then I question myself, how exactly do I distinguish Tarot and Oracle? I mean, the way some tarot cards are organised now (anything goes, really) I suppose I am used to it.

There are hundreds of threads on this, but it wouldn't actually affect my own thinking that much if I thought of my William Blake or my Morgan's Tarot as an "Oracle" (it wouldn't change how I read with it.) Or some of those *out there* LoS ones. At the end of the day it just has to have 78 cards (Oh but the Minchiate and the Mantegna?) because the way these decks are organised today, the structure is so flexible, that - really - anything goes...

And the so called "traditional" Tarot Structure is very, very stretchable.

(I'll be sooo shot down for saying this! )

I find it helps not being strict in my categorisations...

Isn't there a regional/cultural component as well?
As long as the number of cards is listed correctly, I can deal with my own classifications.
Tarot is a type of oracle.

And then sometimes, Im looking on ebay and I see "Vintage Tarot Cards" and my heart leaps and I get all excited and then I click and - hang on - it is Tarot Cards but it's those boring Jeu de Tarot Tarocky things which don't have Majors and Minors as I understand them, but the thing is, they're right and I'm at fault! So I have given up being too pedantic, because I - or rather, the purists - could always say real tarot cards are for gaming...