Thank you for all the effort! The result is very useful and looks great.

> Yes, that's my problem with “object”. Unfortunately, it has a lot of
> meanings in the Lisp world and elsewhere (remember Alan Kay's comment on
> whether C++ is object-oriented).

The word "value" is similarly a bit problematic since it generally
carries a connotation of immutability whereas many Scheme values are
mutable. We probably can't win.

In Lisp circles there would seem to be a cultural understanding that
objects do not necessarily imply classes and methods, though the
overloaded meaning can confuse people coming from newer languages.