Niels Peter Strandberg wrote:
> 
> Why change the name from dbXML to the name Xindice. 

Niels, 

lots of reasoning was placed into this but since there was a commercial
entity named the "dbXML Group" behind the software (commercial entity
that still exists even if doesn't perform any action), when the software
was donated to the ASF, we asked to change the name of the project to
avoid eventual commercial collisions.

The XIndice name was choosen entirely by the dbXML community in a open
way, another discussion on [email protected] happened that
suggested other names, but we choose not to interfere more and trusted
the choice of the dbXML community, giving a sense of total respect for
the hard choice they had to make.

Changing a recognized name is a strident action. I know and I agree, but
I also think it would have been more harmful for the entire XML
community if the ASF rejected the donation for brand/legal/political
reasons.

Kimbro and Tom were *very* brave to bet on a name change, and the
XIndice name might not be a great name after the 'gambling' association
that later emerged (that's why I'd prefer people to write it "XIndice"
instead of "Xindice", to indicate that is x-indice and not x-in-dice,
the home page will indicate the reasoning behind the name), but I think
you are judging this move with a present-oriented bias.

Let me give you my personal future perspective: the "dbXML" name has a
few significant problems:

 1) the 'dbXML group' as an existing (although idle) commercial entity

 2) too similar to the XML:DB name. I have already heard people naming
one for the other. This assonance might seem stupid at first, but since
the goal here is to convince other big players (Software AG, Oracle,
IBM) to join the XML:DB effort and possibly move it to the JCP under an
ASF sponsoring, it would be *MUCH* harder to convince them if there is
too much of an assonance between the API and its proposed
implementation.

 3) as a recent Slashdot thread showed, a name that resembles 'XML
databases' seems to suggest to the wide majority of newbies a relational
database which data is stored on disk as XML files!!! I was shocked to
see that, but I was shocked when I heard the same from other (non
XML-related) ASF members! A more neutral name allows us to avoid those
preconcepts that would scare people away from it.

 4) I believe a native XML database will be much more useful in the
document-centric XML world than it the data-centric one. 'dbXML' seems
to suggest the opposite and will very likely create violent friction
with the relational-based type of people that might judge the concept
from their perception of the name, rather than from the actual contents.

 5)  XIndice is composed of an italian word, resonating with latin.
Isn't hard to find people that understand a little latin between those
that work in the document-centric XML communities.

> Xindice is really a bad name, for this kind of product!!!!

Agreed, but XIndice is not.

Rather the opposite, it's a much better name than dbXML for this effort.

-- 
Stefano Mazzocchi      One must still have chaos in oneself to be
                          able to give birth to a dancing star.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>                             Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply via email to