IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ogpx] resolving the name issue

Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com> Sat, 29 August 2009 23:20 UTC

Return-Path: <carlo@alinoe.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 9FCF23A6A1B for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Aug 2009 16:20:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.372
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.372 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.058, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745]
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 K-aQwESRRYlv for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Aug 2009 16:20:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from viefep18-int.chello.at (viefep18-int.chello.at [62.179.121.38]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73BAE3A69AD for <ogpx@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Aug 2009 16:20:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from edge05.upc.biz ([192.168.13.212]) by viefep18-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.7.09.01.00 201-2219-108-20080618) with ESMTP id <20090829232016.WLZL25702.viefep18-int.chello.at@edge05.upc.biz>; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:20:16 +0200
Received: from mail9.alinoe.com ([77.250.43.12]) by edge05.upc.biz with edge id aPLD1c03a0FlQed05PLF9v; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:20:16 +0200
X-SourceIP: 77.250.43.12
Received: from carlo by mail9.alinoe.com with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <carlo@alinoe.com>) id 1MhXEb-0006A0-1e; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:21:25 +0200
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:21:25 +0200
From: Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>
To: Infinity Linden <infinity@lindenlab.com>
Message-ID: <20090829232125.GC22756@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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3a880e2c0908281259h3a10cd02mc92eb8331c92f162@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Cc: "ogpx@ietf.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: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 23:20:11 -0000

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 12:59:58PM -0700, Infinity Linden wrote:
> also, i just did a google search for VWRAP and got a whole lot of "not
> much." ergo, we're not competing with another common name with lots of
> search results. so from that perspective, i'm starting to get happy
> about the VWRAP name, even though i thought ABOVE was cooler. i think
> morgaine's comments about NOT picking a common name are definitely
> spot on in this regard.

Ok, since everyone else that commented so far seems to be
happy, ignore my VRAX WG proposal ;).

I'm obviously happy with "VWRAP working group".

The argument to leave in 'World' in order to make it a lot
more clear what the WG/protocol is NOT about is a good one too.

-- 
Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email