> The way to parse WSL is that it's a <Windows (NT) Subsystem> for Linux.

For me that still parses wrong on first try. I mean I can make sense of it, because I already know how it is meant, however for me the most obvious assumption is, that it is for the given host and that host is Windows, not Linux. So Linux (compatibility) subsystem for Windows would make more sense to me.

I think rearranging those words in almost any other order would’ve been superior: WLS, LSW, LWS

And the fun part is that since WSL 2 it's no longer a Windows Subsystem, but just a Linux kernel in VM with some nice integrations with host Windows OS.

And how are you supposed to parse the rust library?

A Rust Binding for WinAPI

That doesn't even contain "Rust for Windows"

Shirley you realise WinAPI is officially named the Windows API?

Yeah but MS could actually call this library what it is, not leave it to multiple levels of inference.

And don't call me Shirley!

<A Rust Library> for Windows

That still sounds like it's a Rust library you get to use on Windows, not a library of Windows functions to use from Rust.