[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 'Atom' Should Be It's Name, and It's Name Was Atom

To: Morbus Iff <morbus@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 'Atom' Should Be It's Name, and It's Name Was Atom
From: Bill de hÓra <bill@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:37:02 +0100
Cc: atom-syntax@xxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/>
List-id: <atom-syntax.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-syntax-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <>
Sender: owner-atom-syntax@xxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624

Morbus Iff wrote:

I would like to propose, nay, admonish, that the name of the format and spec
should be Atom, that the current naming vote should be killed, and we should
move on to grander things without the auspices of "what's it called?!" over
our heads. This has been going on far too long.

+1

[a pity since, in my part of the world 'fecho' was a funny name]

Bill de hÓra

Follow-Ups:
- Re: 'Atom' Should Be It's Name, and It's Name Was Atom
  - From: Tim Bray

References:
- 'Atom' Should Be It's Name, and It's Name Was Atom
  - From: Morbus Iff

Prev by Date: Re: 'Atom' Should Be It's Name, and It's Name Was Atom
Next by Date: Re: 'Atom' Should Be It's Name, and It's Name Was Atom
Previous by thread: Re: 'Atom' Should Be It's Name, and It's Name Was Atom
Next by thread: Re: 'Atom' Should Be It's Name, and It's Name Was Atom
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread