Nearby: NameItEchoConflict. Because of the problems with Echo, the new discussion on naming is at ProjectNameProposals.
Name It Echo
This page is for discussion the proposal to name this project/process Echo.
What do you think of the name of this project/process should be? Pie? Echo? See NameIt for the open poll.
-
Echo - the output format would be called Echo, posting would use the Echo API, and tools that could read and/or write would be EchoEnabled [MattHaughey]
-
(+1) When I first saw the name, I thought of "Echo Chamber" but after that passed it really grew on me. [MenaTrott]
-
I like this. The original idea of syndication was to allow posts (or excerpts) appear on other sites as well (hence the word syndication). The word "echo" is nicely evocative of this. [RalphBrandi]
-
+1. In the end I'm more concerned with what the proposed format/protocol does then a name. This is a nice alternative to Pie. It's a bit more serious. [TimothyAppnel]
-
+1 for "Echo". Great name, and not a silly abbreviation, either. [UcheOgbuji]
-
+1, a little more encumbered then Pie, but not as silly. The O'reilly book could have a bat or a dolphin on the cover. Does re-inforce the perception of weblogs as an echo chamber [KellanElliottMcCrea]
-
(+1) everthing [MattHaughey] said [JakeSutton]
-
+1 for Echo. [AdinaLevin]
-
+1 echo on! [MishaDynin]
-
+1 for Echo Echo API. I think this is the one! [Jason Shellen]
-
I still prefer Pie, but could go with Echo; we would have to avoid cheap Bunnymen jokes. [TimBray]
-
Ditto for -belly and dolphins jokes, then, I guess. [XavierBorderie]
-
+1, implicit meaning, less pedestrian, less susceptible to bad metaphorical stabs [GrantCarpenter]
-
+1, this makes sense for non-tech users, who shouldn't be exposed to acronyms or geekiness. and I can see my camera phone saying EchoEnabled on it. [AnilDash]
-
+1 In the light of counterswaying arguments I get to change my mind, right? "Echo" does have a bit more class than "Pie". [StanFinley]
-
Hm, Echo does have something. After all, you're echo-ing your digital input into the blogosphere. Or should it be "Resonance"...? [AdriaanTijsseling]
-
+1, as long as we can have a Test for Echo [LesOrchard]
-
Splunge for me. I mean, I vote for Echo. It works in all the right ways. So, how long before a weblog tool called Echolalia appears? [ChristianCrumlish]
-
+1 Hmm, yeah. "Echo" has a nice ring to it and some semantical meaning too. Echo - it's what everyone's talking about. [TomasJogin]
-
+1 Seems to be a real hit ! i'll follow. -- FrançoisGranger
-
Not sure about this. I like the name itself, but doesn't echo reflects the emptiness of a room to common mortals ? [XavierBorderie]
-
No, I don't think so. Most will think of the sound an Echo makes (think blogoshpere), not the space in which an Echo is found in (and if they do, how many people will think Church and not void? My point is that the point is moot). [TomasJogin]
-
[PhilWolff] Don't echoes fade, come across as shallow, pale imitations?
-
[ChristianCrumlish] Good question. What about "Reverb"?
-
Echoes fade, but they aren't imitations. I'd argue that fading is an appropriate metaphor, especially if your feed only provides summaries. Even if it doesn't, the fact that the information in the feed is out of its original context makes it metaphorically "fainter"
-
Well. Everyone says that bloggers are narcissists. (Echo -- Narcissus -- oh, never mind.)
-
+1 for Echo [StevenGarrity]
-
+1 for Echo [MatthewGifford]
-
Definitely Echo. [MattMower]
-
I liked Pie, but I like Echo better. [Manuzhai]
-
What happens when Echo.com (who is involved in digital music distribution) creates an API for its customers?
-
I still prefer Pie, but if it's "Echo" maybe spelling it "Eko" would improve its googlability. [ArthurJennings]
-
+1 Both pie and echo have homonyms: pi (many languages), ecco (italian). Pie's is much better known and more referenced, so less attractive. [PhilWolff]
-
+1 Simple, catchy, a nice and fitting name. [wootest]
-
+1 Yes, I like it too. It grows on me. [AsbjornUlsberg]
-
There is an issue with this name -- as Joe Shelby mentioned in comments attached to a weblog posting (at http://weblog.burningbird.net/fires/001306.htm), Echo was the name of a Java framework released earlier this month. This is only going to cause confusion between both efforts. And since they were first...I strongly recommend this group NOT use Echo -- or justify 'hijacking' the name from a product that's being released LGPL. I will ask that there be consensus from this group that you're willing to use the name of another technology. [ShelleyPowers]
-
Is this really a big deal? I mean, the two cannot be confused, can they? There is virtually no name what-so-ever that isn't "taken" already to this effect. Take "Pie" for example, there's this other thing you eat that's called "Pie". That doesn't matter though, as long as it isn't possible to confuse the two. [TomasJogin]
-
Yes, but I don't think a Java version of an API for "Pie" would conflict with that thing you eat. If someone creates a Java version of the Echo Project's defined API, then we literally have two 'Echo Java APIs' -- and that is a pretty strong conflict. Don't take my word -- google on Java and Echo and API in a month or so. [ShelleyPowers]
-
What's the consensus on the name conflict? [NameItEchoConflict]