Re: Try to social-engineer the protocol public name?

[Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@xxxxxx>]

Tim Bray wrote:
> As Aristotle pointed out, what we're building seems to be slipping by 
> default into being referred to as "APP".   Could be worse, I suppose, 
> it's short and punchy.  Which means that it's only a matter of time 
> before people are saying "Does that app talk APP?"  The only practical 
> problem might be on the mac, which uses the .app extension, but that 
> doesn't seem like a biggie.
>
> So this is an invitation.  Is there another, more compelling, name that 
> we should rally around for the Atom Publishing Protocol?  If we all 
> agreed informally to start using something, and got our employers to do 
> the same, it's (just barely) not too late to affect the outcome.  
> "Atompub" and "Atom protocol" are OK, or we could just always and 
> consistently just say "Atom" and sort out the confusion with RFC4287 
> down the road.  Better idea?  Or just go with the flow and live with APP?

Long name: "Atom Publishing Protocol"

Short name: "AtomPub"

Best regards, Julian