- From: tim finin <finin@cs.umbc.edu>
- Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 10:51:26 -0400
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Jim Hendler wrote: > ... > One thing I've learned in interacting with people about"The Web Ontology > Language, OWL" is that on the web, being cute is a bad idea. People in > the business world have little or no humor when it comes to this stuff. > Let's try hard not to be "funny" and risk either the language being > ignored as a toy or the language developers renaming it to what THEY > think are good names. > ... > They felt one of our versions should just be called OWL, it will make it > easier for them to sell "OWL" projects - they didn't care too much which > - if Fast Owl is called OWL, they would prefer the "bigger" one be > called Plus or Full or something positive, if the other way (which they > slightly preferred) they actually liked DL (or Description Logic) > ... Good advice, I am sure. Following another common commercial naming scheme might result in the following: OWL lite OWL OWL professional or OWL pro and we can remain silent about the target profession for the last.
Received on Sunday, 20 October 2002 10:51:42 UTC