On 9/5/05, Jack Carroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 11:39:52AM -0700, Zan Lynx wrote: > > Timothy Miller wrote: > > > (snip) > > >> > > >>If picking between Card or Adapter, I vote for Card. > > >> > > >> > > > > > >Unfortunately, I have agree with you. I was thinking that TTOGA (or > > >TOGA or just pronounced like 'toga') would be a good name. But you're > > >right. > > > > > > > > [snip] > > How about Open Graphics Adapter Card: OGAC > > > I like the thinking in this thread a _lot_. I think the letter > combination OGA will suggest the right concepts to the intended audience. > The fully written-out phrase is even better. How about: > > OGA means Open Graphics Architecture. > Any ASIC that implements an OGA is an OGA IC. > Any board containing an OGA implementation is an OGA Card.
I'm diggin' this. > > Those would become generic trade names for a broad class of > products, rather than names for specific products. Now, if we do it that > way, do we still need product names, or is it enough to give each product a > unique part number that identifies its exact features within the category > "OGA Card"? Traversal board part numbers might begin OGA- or OGA1-. > (Since there may be more than one OGA spec over time, we might want > to start right off calling the first architecture implemented in ASIC > OGA1. The alternative is to call the first one OGA and any successors OGA2, > OGA3, etc., but I think that's more likely to invite confusion.) I'm cool with OGA1, OGA2, etc. for spec names, although I think we should use a decimalized version number. We'll have OGA1.1 at some point, and the chip will be called the OGA1.1 IC. You won't have a chip without a corresponding spec, and if there's a deviation (like there's an update to the spec that doesn't require an IC change), we can use names like OGA1.3.1. This general 1-to-1 correspondence between spec and IC should alleviate confusion. As for the PCB, one chip will give us many boards. We could just give them OGC names, completely independent of of the ASIC revision. And, as discussed before, we could name the model where a letter corresponds to a feature, of course preferring popular letters like 'X', 'L', 'Z', and 'Q'. :) So, we'd have the basic board being the "OGC1 X" (because it has TV), and a version that has twice as much memory is the "OGC1 XL", etc. > > This is a lot like what DEC did with the Tulip family. There are > several Tulip ASICs, and an assortment of Tulip boards containing those > ASICs. The Linux kernel has 3 or 4 Tulip drivers available for selection. > The Tulip name is associated mainly with the register model which is > presented to the driver. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Change of subject: > > I did a little looking around the other night for existing uses of > some of the other names suggested earlier. > > Claritas had all kinds of uses. Claritus is the name of a big > hospital chain, but I didn't find anything associated with computers or > graphics. > Claritos had lots of Google hits, but only in the Spanish language. > Graphicard had some hits at USPTO, but only for printed greeting > cards, and mostly abandoned. > Clarian had a lot of hits, I forget for what. > > I'll see what I can find for OGA. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > We'd need a different name for the FPGA development board, since > it's not a fixed implementation of OGA or whatever we finally call it. I > suggested Bridgehead the other day (or Beachhead). Opinions? I don't see why we can't continue with the same naming convention. We could use OG, because it IS associated with the project, or we could use TT because it's a Traversal product, so it's TTP1 or something like that. I think OGP for that is nice, but it might cause confusion, unless the Open Graphics Project is renamed to something like the Open Graphics Foundation, but that's pointless until there's a group of contributors large enough to need their own governance. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
