Perhaps DRY was a good shortcut to RCL and SST (single source of truth). Those two are really important. DRY is an approximation to them (a good one in most cases).
Are you speaking about DRY on a syntactic basis, or the version from The Pragmatic Programmer ("Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system")?
I would say "was intended to mean.". The acronym is catchy and seems sufficiently self explanatory that I think your initial interpretation may be more common.
I've been jokingly pushing for over-application of syntax-focused DRY to be called "Huffman coding"
