No problem with the dialog, but I suspect that there's a fundamental difference between you and I. You're very interested is the trees, while I think about the forest.

When thinking about stuff like this I ask myself 3 questions.

1- is there a difference?
2- is it significant?
3- is it material to the problem at hand.

When it comes to spokes, I don't fret minor improvements, because of the 3rd question. Spoke fatigue life, is and was very long for as long as I've been building wheels (nearly 50 years). Most modern builders are using more steel than we used to, so whatever improvements might have occurred are moot since nobody is capitalizing on them anyway.

IMO - strength and fatigue life improvement (if any) don't matter because those aren't the deciding factors in wheel construction. Wheels don't fail because of the spokes, which will outlast rims, bikes, and/owner attention spans, so I don't care what possible longer life there might be.

I suspect that the real limiting factor is wheel rigidity, because we're already seeing some issues of brake rub due to flex. So we're using more steel than needed to meet strength and fatigue life requirements, and can't cut into that deep enough to matter.

By the same token, I have no interest in spoke makers' alloy choices, processes. I leave that up to them, the same way I leave recipes to good cooks. Actually, when I choose spoke brands my most important considerations include thread quality and uniformity of length within a batch. These are important to me because they make building faster and easier, and it's been my experience that the mechanical properties are very similar among the quality brands I've used.

So, I appreciate your interest in the details, but it's not something I ever dwell on.

BTW- when I manufactured bike tools, people always asked for specs, and my reply was always the same,.... sorry, that's on a need to know basis.