Although patent applications should be readable, they are different from normal writing. If something is an "inspection opening", in a more normally written document you might think you and the reader are getting tired of seeing those words and you might say "observation window" just to make it not so repetitive. In patent writing do not worry about being repetitive. Generally, if it is a spade keep calling it a spade. There are reasons to use different terminology for almost the same thing in some cases but generally you should give everything a name and stick with it throughout. I would not recommend making up multiple acronyms. I have read patents that are very hard to follow due to that practice. (The ABC fits into the BNM when the TRK is lined up with the RTY.) One acronym for something major seems ok.
An easy way wording can narrow the interpretation of your invention is to use the word "invention" or otherwise confuse a particular version, example or embodiment as The Invention. Google "patent profanity". We don't say "the invention has a handle". We say "some embodiments consistent with these teachings have a handle (or include a handle)". - "The specific implementation seen in FIG. 23 has a handle." is fine.
Anyway, it is not a silly question but the acronym issue will likely not be the biggest hurdle to drafting a good application.
