Re: Deciding on the name

[Michael Smith <smith@xml-doc.org>]

James Clark <jjc@jclark.com> writes:

> We need to choose a name soon.

I realize we're a little far along for brand-new suggestions, but in
trying to think of a good short name that connotes the qualities of
the language well-- a TREX-RELAX mix, a minimalist approach-- I
thought of a couple I think would work well (in order of preference):

  1. MiX XML Schema

  2. MiXML Schema

In the case of the first, including "XML Schema" in the official name
may seem redundant, but I still think it's important for it to be
there (and there are many other abbreviations that are redundant in a
similar way, so it's not that unusual). Take your pick on pronouncing
the second: "my XML schema" (like MySQL) or "mix-imal schema".

And a couple more short names:

  3. LuX XML Schema

  4. NuXML Schema

The first in the "let there be light" sense, "fiat lux"-- which would
make a nice promotional tagline for the language, and one that would
lend itself to a nice logo. Second of course is "new XML schema"

And I don't think including "XML Schema" or "Schema" in the official
name would actually make any of the names unwieldy in practice. I'm
sure that once people are familiar with it, they'll just use the first
part when refering to it-- i.e. MiX, MiXML, LuX, or NuXML.

> To start the decision making process, please could anybody who cares
> send a message with the names they find acceptable in order of
> preference.
> 
> Here's my list (most preferred first):
> 
> 1. URELAX (Unified Relax)
> 
> 2. RELAX NG (Relaxing, RELAX Next Generation)
> 
> 3. iRELAX (Improved RELAX, ISO RELAX, increment RELAX)

Of those, the one that seems most workable to me is RELAX NG.

  --Mike S.