Re: [action 63] naming our standard

I have a strong preference for ITS 2.0. The fact that there is a bigger
scope doesn't count for me. Take the case of XML: it is called a "markup
language", although many e.g. service oriented applications don't have to
do with markup at all. Also, we are chartered to produce the successor of
ITS - not calling this "ITS 2.0" will lead to confusion.

Felix

Am 19. April 2012 11:42 schrieb David Lewis <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>:

> As discussed in the last TC, as we increasingly advertise the work of our
> group, it becomes more important that we decide what we call it.
>
> Possible option are:
> 'ITS 2.0'
> pros: established brand
> cons: focus on internationalisation whereas the delta is more related to
> localisation and even publication
>
> 'MLW-LT':
> pros: matches name of the group
> cons: perhaps not very descriptive of a standard
>
> Other options might be to extend the ITS brand to encompass the stronger
> localisation, e.g
> - Localisation and Internationalisation Tag Set (LITS)?
>
> What are you opinions? Any other suggestions?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>


-- 
Felix Sasaki
DFKI / W3C Fellow