Re: [ogpx] resolving the name issue

[Joshua Bell <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:16 AM, Morgaine <[e-mail]>wrote;wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Joshua Bell <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>
>> 1. Agent Based Open Virtual Environments Working Group - ABOVE ("above")
>> 2. Virtual World Region/Agent Protocol Working Group - VWRAP ("v-wrap")
>>
>
> I support the *Region/Agent* part of #2 because it refers to  the central
> idea in this proposal that makes it distinct from other interop protocols.
> In particular, it distinguishes this work from other proposals that would be
> in the scope of MMOX.
>
> In contrast, the *Virtual World* part of #2 just adds fuel to the problems
> that have been highlighted here about the redefinition of this phrase in OGP
> compared to its use by everyone else in this sphere.  That issue isn't going
> away, and will become ever harder as we begin to focus on use cases for
> cross-world interop.
>

That's a healthy concern, but I think we need to bite the bullet and risk
the dreaded "Virtual World" phrase in the name. It is *so* evocative to
anyone inside and outside the space and leaves little ambiguity about the
problem domain. No, it isn't specific enough, hence the qualifiers.

MMOX suffered from being far too broad a name (MMO = WoW to most of the
planet). VW is still broad, but I think we can handle it. After all, while
we're focused on the subset of VWs that share Region/Agent concepts, the
protocols may appeal to others. (And it's not limited to the domain, of
course; I was trying to evangelize LLSD in Stockholm.)

Dropping "World" leaves phrases that only make sense to people in the know.
I would expect "Virtual Region" or more so "Virtual Domain" to invite
queries from far afield within the IETF ("Virtual domain? is that like DDNS
kicked up a notch?")

So... like others, I guess I'm putting my voice behind "VWRAP" - kudos to
Carlo for the suggestion.

Can list participants agree to VWRAP as "not perfect, but good enough" and
move past the name issue to real interop work?