Since everyone here seems so confused by USB naming schemes, a short primer:
USB 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, and USB4 are the major and minor revision number of the standard. You don't have to worry about it if you are not implementing it yourself.
The Gen number indicates the supported transfer speed, Gen 1 is 5Gbps, Gen 2 is 10, Gen 3 is 20, regardless of the spec revision.
(USB 2.0 is 480mbps)
Dual lane (Gen ?x2) means you take the speed of the Gen number and multiply it by 2.
The only major difference between USB 3 and 4 is that USB4 uses Type C plug only, whereas USB 3 can use a variety of connectors.
All USB-PD compliant cables support up to 100w of power delivery, only cables labeled as EPR (extended power range) supports up to 240w of power.
What the above user is saying is how it's listed in specs and technical documents
What you are saying is how the USB IF recommends it be marketed. In theory, yours is the only one the average person should worry about these days
However in the real world it's an absolute mess of OEMs advertising their ports as being one or the other naming schemes, or neither and just saying "USB"
I wish smartwatches were included too so that I could travel with just one charger and one cable. I guess waterproofing a USB-C port is not that easy though (for the ratings those watches usually have).
Yeah. Wireless charging helps some of that, especially if the pad is itself connected through a USB-C cable.
Ideally, in my mind, someday phones themselves will be able to charge wireless devices, so we'll connect the phone through the USB-C cable and place the watch on top and they'll both be ready to go in the morning.
Yeah I think they'll definitely get in trouble for that. Nintendo's official statement that "third party chargers will void your warranty" is pretty clearly a breach of the common charger rule.
And it's not an empty claim either, some standards compliant third party chargers can actually damage a Nintendo Switch. Nintendo will have to fix that, or else their products might be banned across the EU.
I just wish there was a standard for marking the cables, so you could look at the cable and tell what it was capable of. All the cables and chargers look the same but have wildly different capabilities. 
Yeah i discovered that and i was extremely furious. I bought a usbc cable around 10€ and it wasn't working because the device only supported a certain type of usbc. Apparently, there is some info about information in the eu website.
But i'm not able to understand any technical part...i just want a color : yellow charger/cable go with yellow port. Etc.
I'll break it down for you - it's a long list but easy to understand:
Some cables have four internal wires. Others have over a dozen wires.
Some have thin wires, some have thick wires. The thick ones cost more and are less flexible - the main benefit is they can be longer while charging quickly.
Some cables have the internal wires wrapped in plastic. Others have them wrapped in plastic then that's wrapped in a metal shield, then that's wrapped in another plastic layer. The latter is more reliable and not just for the cable itself (without shielding, the cable can interfere with other electronics that are near the cable - such as your computer or phone.
Some are just ordinary cabling, and some have complex circuitry embedded in the cable to run advanced algorithms to remove noise from the cable - this is necessary to achieve high data rates at long cable lengths.
Nearly all use copper cables. A few use fibre optic cables. This can handle even longer cable lengths
Some cables are just like "whatever this will do", and others are well designed and carefully manufactured/tested/etc.
.
i just want a color : yellow charger/cable go with yellow port. Etc.
There would need to be something like a fifty colors. The USB standards body is pushing cable manufacturers to use labels that show data rates (gigabits per second) and power capabilities (watts) on every cable. That will help a lot, but for all the other stuff (especially shielding and general quality...) you need to rely on either brand reputation or third party tests. Even then you need to be careful, because the best brands don't put all those features in every cable (too expensive).
Also unfortunately at 10€ you get what you pay for. The better brands all charge more than that.
and the naming scheme doesn't make it any better, "USB 3.2 Gen 3 with USB PD and/or CuickCharge" just doesn't make sense to rationally thinking people.
how about "USB C-C up to X amount of mbytes and 100W charging"?
The charging side is complicated to mark accurately because it has to consider current and voltage. Like, a cable might be able to do 60W, but only at 2A@30V, 3A@20V would melt the cable.
We need something like resistor band labeling for chargers. Yellow for 1A, Green for 2A and another band for the charging standard such as PD QC3.0 and so on.
As it stands now we are going to need a station in stops to test cables.
Some Chinese manufacturers are already working on undermining this by releasing 12V non-PD devices that use the plug. Those devices are not compatible with regular chargers and if you use their power supply for something else that device will be destroyed (because it’s designed for 5V not 12).
europa.eu
Hot