[MSF-Discuss] Re: [UMN_MAPSERVER-USERS] Autodesk product naming poll

[Ken Lord]

Hi Tyler,

I hope it doesn't look like I'm just a contrarian to everything, I'm
not intentionally targetting you, I very much appreciate the help
you've given me in the past ...

Personally I think it sounds just fine for the foundation to use the
MapServer name, for MapServer to use the MapServer, and other products
within the foundation to use their own names.

It lends some history to things and doesn't contradict the arguement
against giving every product MapServer somewhere in its name.

Mapguide, by the MapServer foundation
MapServer, by the MapServer foundation
Product X, by the MapServer foundation

... All seems to sound fine.

Each product keeps its own name, eliminating the brutal confusion that
some of us have already experienced with the public and with GIS aware
people, and the link / purpose / history is kept alive by the name of
the foundation.  There's no new unknown brand to sell.

It seems to work just fine for the Apache Software Foundation.

Anyways, I'll reign in my crazed ramblings, my arguement over product
naming appears to be moot judging by the 8 votes for the Smurf naming
convention and 70 votes for not giving the MapServer name to Autodesk.

Happy Holidays,
Ken Lord
Vancouver BC




On 12/22/05, Mike Davis <mike.and.kerry at gmail.com> wrote:
> The MapTools name is a good one... if DM Solutions is interested in parting
> with it.  Otherwise I previously mentioned the "Open Source GIS Foundation"
> or OSGIS.  It may be a little dry, but it certainly conveys the message.  I
> also like that it is ambiguous and leaves room for projects that I wouldn't
> classify as tools... for example if the foundation ever got into the
> business of providing open source data layers.
>
> ...plus you can pronounce the acronym fairly easily :-)
>
>
> On 12/22/05, Tyler Mitchell <tylermitchell at shaw.ca> wrote:
> > On December 22, 2005 06:07, Paul Spencer wrote:
> > > I'm really starting to think that the foundation should be called
> > > MapTools ...
> >
> > I am too.  As much as I would hate to see the word "MapServer" come off
> the
> > foundation name, we can't have our 'protect the brand' cake and eat it
> too.
> > The arguments against sharing the MapServer brand name with other projects
> > also affects the naming of the foundation.  If we are saying that other
> > products shouldn't have any association with the MapServer name, then
> > logically those projects should not be part of a foundation called
> MapServer
> > either.  Many people are saying that naming other projects with the word
> > MapServer is confusing, then having a foundation called MapServer with
> > non-MapServer projects becomes just as confusing.
> >
> > Unfortunately, by naming the foundation something more generic, MapServer
> > itself will lose a bit of the potential PR and perceived central role that
> we
> > had hope would come with having a foundation named after it.
> >
> > I think this warrants further debate, I'll start a thread on the
> foundation
> > discussion list.
> >
> > Tyler
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.mapserverfoundation.org
> http://lists.mapserverfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>