IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ogpx] resolving the name issue

Meadhbh Siobhan <meadhbh.siobhan@gmail.com> Sun, 30 August 2009 18:54 UTC

Return-Path: <meadhbh.siobhan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 989153A6949 for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:54:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.548
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.051, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mDuV03+-7Ml9 for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:54:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iw0-f200.google.com (mail-iw0-f200.google.com [209.85.223.200]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB38A3A67D7 for <ogpx@ietf.org>; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:54:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iwn38 with SMTP id 38so1553941iwn.29 for <ogpx@ietf.org>; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=xu7w2rDNMkJtmgQNxyA6BNCqpO1WOlNcuVvvONn1BKA=; b=G7iYWsHXoQh43c4NxbB1QtWtx0jNm9Crrmah07GQ/T3etA5oyH/hpksX4VUmTHKalK jxRh4u6N7ftGhLJiw9+f0ePdYRqLhAtyPFM4uxGOGr4iDEEYIq3IJxOZIQrKXey4Qxys tgnTlixGq242KuBqfkplZdWVD91XNCV8VVuuA=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=x7U8BJcDwyxDqz1UKWdkO+0MlnLUs+f9pj71PdJ7UiGQW+bPi6nhYSWDjzbJicST00 bbyQ/wUwkkA3g9yZLGSV1PebszfjdaQ7+c7TG4bmRmVDoOG2BPp/1TjTvJvwbxvwbM16 cUqEWKxrMSW8JZtVn9z13K0XfGRgxmf/6/nG8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.63.197 with SMTP id c5mr5505574ibi.4.1251658465333; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20090830130045.GA29271@alinoe.com>
References: <3a880e2c0908211129l7d9defa5od81261e3e5805714@mail.gmail.com> <479011.65903.qm@web111210.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <e0b04bba0908280416w60e9c7cdre7e3eaef3e244cb1@mail.gmail.com> <e0b04bba0908281056q373b1dd4gf36a9e24cf3d8bfc@mail.gmail.com> <4646639E08F58B42836FAC24C94624DD6FE8098411@GVW0433EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net> <3a880e2c0908281259h3a10cd02mc92eb8331c92f162@mail.gmail.com> <20090829232125.GC22756@alinoe.com> <6c9fcc2a0908300553x57c76279p9a95c105f0e7e34a@mail.gmail.com> <20090830130045.GA29271@alinoe.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:54:25 -0700
Message-ID: <b8ef0a220908301154m331f685fh6237811b42cbfe2a@mail.gmail.com>
From: Meadhbh Siobhan <meadhbh.siobhan@gmail.com>
To: Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: barryleiba@computer.org, ogpx@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ogpx] resolving the name issue
X-BeenThere: ogpx@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual Worlds and the Open Grid Protocol <ogpx.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ogpx>
List-Post: <mailto:ogpx@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 18:54:19 -0000

what version of the draft are you looking at? the most recent version
uses "protocol" almost exclusively (using "protocols" only in one spot
near the initialism OGPX.)

i'm not saying this to argue for or against the use of "protocol" over
"protocols," only to point out that we might be looking at different
revisions of the draft charter.

On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 6:00 AM, Carlo Wood<carlo@alinoe.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 08:53:58AM -0400, Barry Leiba wrote:
>> As I read things, it should stand for Virtual World Region/Agent
>> Protocols (note the final "s"), giving the name the flexibility to
>> cover multiple related protocols (one of which could certainly be
>> called "VWRAP" as well, and would, in that case, have no "s".
>
> Virtual Worlds Region/Agent Protocol(s)
>
> no opinion yet on the s behind Protocol, but there should be
> an 's' behind Worlds.
>
> This is already done correctly in the draft.
>
> --
> Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>
> _______________________________________________
> ogpx mailing list
> ogpx@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email