I named this knife the DEK1 from the outset because it will be a platform conducive to variants. While the effectiveness of the knife is the result of a combination of things, specific elements- such as blade grind or shape- can be changed in order to pursue more nuanced design criteria. If piercing ability and tip strength is a priority, a geometric tip profile can be employed. If light weight and defensive capability are the priority, a double grind can be employed. If preparing food is the priority, the tip can be dropped and the edge straightened. While these potential variants would effect the general character of the pattern, the overall profile of it can remain more or less static.
The DEK1 will be the most utilitarian model in the (potential) DEK series. It will have a strong tip, and an emphasis on overall cutting ability. All models will share the same compact handle designed for unobtrusive carry, and comfort and control in using a variety of grip techniques.
The FK and FK2 is a different thing, from a naming perspective, as is the EDC and EDC2. In both instances, the knives have and will be tweaked in order to make them better for what they were intended to do. These running changes are integral to further production of each knife. Personally, I think the numerical designation from these models could be dropped, since the original model vanishes when replaced with the new one.
Theoretically, DEK1, DEK2, DEK3, etc could be offered concurrently, satisfying expectations for a knife of this type by a wider audience. Obviously, we'll have to see how things go with this knife. It could very well be a flop, although I'm hedging that it'll be the opposite of that.