Al Rosen's view is one adopted by many people I have met over the years. Sort of like "a rose by any other name . . ."
In my own practice, I tend to think of a "form" as being a specialized "template."
To elaborate: many organizations try to have a "look and feel" to all the documents in the organization (same letterhead, same margins, same font, same color ink, etc. to the point of nausea.)
Such organizations create a "template" upon which ALL documents are based (further divided into text templates, drawing templates, flow chart templates, etc.)
Using the "template," an organization may create a "form" with spaces for data to be added to make a record of activity.
Just because I use this delineation in my practice does NOT make it the World Standard - it's just something I find "convenient." To the best of my knowledge and experience, there is no specific World Standard which forces an organization to call the document with spaces for entering data a "Form."
In fact, over the years, I have seen the document called
- "template"
- "data chart"
- "inspection record blank"
- "shipper"
- "packer"
- "inspection slip"
- "tally sheet"
As long as the organization
(or somebody senior enough to make his word stick) gives it a name, and uses the name consistently, no auditor on earth can issue a valid finding against the use of the term.
Short answer - Organization has power to choose term it will use.