On Jan 25, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > "The Hague" is evidently the official, formal name. "Den Hague" in Dutch. > > Back to ODF Toolkit, it appears that "The" as in a formal name is not an > Apache practice. It also becomes awkward to bolt into the name. I wouldn't > say "the Apache ODF Toolkit 0.95."
It is The Apache Software Foundation and The ASF. See http://www.apache.org/ For POI. It is The Apache POI Project and also Apache POI. So, for this podling. Is it "The Apache ODF Toolkit Project". "The Apache ODF Toolkit", and/or "Apache ODF Toolkit"? Any of the three, either of two forms, or just one form. It doesn't matter to me. Regards, Dave > > What has us use the definite article in some places and not others is a > mystery. Something for Daniel Pink to blog about, perhaps. > > - Dennis > > PS: I notice that I am finding it easier and easier to just say "ODF Toolkit" > to myself. Curious and more curious. (My spell-checker doesn't want me to > quote Alice in Wonderland.) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 09:40 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: "Apache ODF Toolkit" versus "The Apache ODF Toolkit" > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton > <[email protected]> wrote: >> < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands_(terminology)>. For the Dutch, >> it is "Nederland", not "Nederlands" and the "the" is not part of the name, >> no more than in "the United States." >> > > Well, in English it is required. "The Hague" is another one. > >> It appears that the definite article is not required and, when used, does >> not have to be considered part of the nomenclature. I.e., "the Apache >> OpenOffice project". >> >> I agree that "Apache ODF Toolkit" is difficult to refer to without saying >> "the". I wonder, as does Rob, whether this is simply a matter of habit. I >> don't have the tendency with "Apache Subversion" or any other Apache >> <one-word> projects that I can think of. >> > > Looking at other Apache projects with multi-word names, I see examples > of both patterns: > > -- "the Apache HTTP Server" > -- "the Apache Portable Runtime Server" > > but > > -- "Apache Traffic Server" > -- "Apache Directory Studio" > > One thing appears common, that even if there is no "the" in the > product name, the project is referred to as "the foo project". > >> >> >> - Dennis >> >> PS: If there were a version number, the desired to prefix "the" goes away! >> Apache ODF Toolkit 0.90, for example. That's how it works for me. >> "Toolkit" seems to be the culprit. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 08:48 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: "Apache ODF Toolkit" versus "The Apache ODF Toolkit" >> >> Something that has been bothering me, a little inconsistency. >> >> The legacy project, pre-incubation, was with an organization called >> "The ODF Toolkit Union". We referred to the project as "The ODF >> Toolkit". >> >> Now that we're here, we add "Apache" to our name. But are we "The >> Apache ODF Toolkit" or just "Apache ODF Toolkit"? >> >> -- "I download Apache ODF Toolkit" versus "I downloaded the Apache ODF >> Toolkit" >> >> -- "Welcome to Apache ODF Toolkit project" versus "Welcome to the >> Apache ODF Toolkit project" >> >> and so on. >> >> I'm seeing both forms in use on our website and our communications. >> We should probably agree on one or the other. >> >> To me, the form without the "the" seems unnatural and awkward, but >> that might just be from my long exposure to the legacy name. >> Similarly, there is nothing intrinsically odd about referring to >> "Netherlands" rather then "the Netherlands" other than convention puts >> a "the" there. >> >> Does anyone have a preference, or a good argument for one form over the >> other. >> >> -Rob >> >
