"The USB-IF never intended for the those terms to be used in marketing materials, though. To help clarify the two different speeds of USB 3.1 and the various other protocols that can run over USB connectors (eg, Type-A and Type-C), the group created terminology and visual branding. For example, USB 3.1 Gen 1 is “SuperSpeed USB,” and USB 3.1 Gen 2 is “SuperSpeed USB+.”"
Yeah, that makes total sense. Distinguishing between SuperSpeed USB and SuperSpeed USB+ at a glance is soooo easy. Of course. And easy to say! Just rolls off the tongue. And why is SuperSpeed faster than, say, Full speed? I've never - ever! - heard a single person use those "marketing terms" for USB standards. Ever. Get rid of them, please.
Separating technical terms and marketing terms like this makes no sense. We already had 1.0 and 1.1 too long ago for anyone to remember, 2, 3 and the next should obviously have been 4. Considering there is zero noticeable end-user difference between 3.0 and 3.1G1, they should have kept that named 3.0 and added a "rev. 2" in the documentation, while otherwise changing nothing at all from how it works today. Then they name 3.1G2 "4" (or at least 3.5 - "it's like 3, but faster") to make the 2x performance difference clear to end users. This would clear up any confusion, and honestly, placing the burden of ensuring compatibility and spec compliance on engineers is... their job. If there's zero practical difference between 3.0 and 3.1G1, what's the worst that could happen?