Intel actually did the opposite, and renamed their second attempt at a 10nm process as "10nm" and dubbed the next iterative refinement of that as "10nm+". They'

Intel actually did the opposite, and renamed their second attempt at a 10nm process as "10nm" and dubbed the next iterative refinement of that as "10nm+". They're trying to pretend the failed 10nm process used for Cannonlake never happened. And to some extent, their continual promises to investors that "10nm" and "7nm" were on track force them to actually ship something under those names.