strawman fallacy and secundum quid

I was wondering whether strawman fallacy is another name for secundum quid. They both involve oversimplification. Do I understand it correctly? Thank you very much.

Firstly there are quite a few fallacies involving oversimplification or overly simple thought processes- causal reductionism, hasty generalisation, secundum quid, and sometimes the strawman fallacy, among others. But that leads to my next point.

A strawman may involve making a simple argument more complicated too, so it seems unrealistic or lofty. The outcome is to misrepresent the argument, however that misrepresentation comes about.

Secundum quid is more synonymous with the accident fallacy . Have a look at this definition and examples and you can see the differences.

I'd put it under a hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, leaping to a conclusion, hasty induction, converse accident), e.g., basing a broad conclusion on a small sample.