Interesting point about XML Tom.
Marketing/branding is important, unfortunately. It has been my
theory that XML never would have gotten as far as it did without
its cool (at that time) acronym with an "X" in it. I believe that
if they had called it some like "EML" instead, it wouldn't have
caught on as much.
So let's come up with a cool identifier for Lightweight DITA!
Mark Giffin Consulting, Inc.
On 6/29/2016 10:34 AM, Tom Magliery wrote:
This stuff is always "(Not so) silly".
I remember going on 20 years ago a discussion thread in the
"SGML for the Web" committee at W3C called "Naming the baby".
Backronyms like FINCH always have appeal, but rarely are
anything but clunky. Can you imagine if the new spawn of the
markup community in 1997 had been called MAGMA? That was one
of the actual possibilities on the table, with a meaning
filled in and everything. (Hmm, now why does that one stick in
my head?) Thank goodness James Clark came up with "XML". At
least I think it was James. Every other possibility
effectively vanished from consideration within seconds of that
Anyway, I have no stake in this matter, but FWIW the name I've
had in my own head ever since this all started is not on
Mark's list: LWDITA.
JustSystems Canada, Inc.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org on behalf of
Sent: Wed 6/29/2016 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] (Not so) silly question
I have been using "LW DITA" (no hyphen) as a shorthand. I
personally don't like the hyphen in "LW-DITA". But I do think
it's a good idea to have an official short version, thanks for
bringing this up Carlos. I would follow what we decide on. I
think it's something we should use consistently in "official"
subcommittee communications like the upcoming spec. It's a
branding thing that can cut down on confusion.
For the record, our official OASIS subcommittee name is
"Lightweight DITA Subcommittee".
Here are some names I wrote down a while ago when we were
discussing this. Like Carlos, my first choice was always
FINCH - Fully Intelligent New Content Hierarchy
Mark Giffin Consulting, Inc.
On 6/29/2016 9:49 AM, Scott Hudson wrote:
We could get all Marketing-like and call it "DITA
Light" or "DITA Lite" or lDITA.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
On Behalf Of Don Day
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 10:46 AM
Subject: Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] (Not so) silly
question about acronym
I admit that I use "lwd-" as a concise, namespace
prefix for many of my test materials and folders, and I've
been the person using LwD as finger-saving acronym in my
communications. I could see using LW-DITA in more formal OASIS
versions down the road, but that is still too many keystrokes
for chats and notes for now, in my opinion. I see it as a
development vs branding issue.
On 6/29/2016 11:35 AM, Carlos Evia wrote:
Dear Lightweight DITA SC people,
As I work on my current writing project (which
is, surprise, about Lightweight DITA), I wonder if we have an
"official" acronym. Some of us use LwD, and others do LW-DITA.
We also had, briefly, hopes on FINCH, but that puppy died
shortly after the DITA NA conference in Chicago last year.
So. is there an official acronym? Do we need
Carlos Evia, Ph.D.
Director of Professional and Technical Writing
Associate Professor of Technical Communication
Department of English
Center for Human-Computer Interaction
Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112