On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:28:05 +0900, bkml <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> William Suffil wrote ...
>
>> As far as the name goes <snip> it becomes an issue to what to
>> name it.
>
> It's not really an issue, nor is it voodoo either ;)
>
>
> HOW THE PRO's DO THIS
>
> A few years ago one of the duties of a project management role I had
> then was to interact with one of the world's leading branding
> agencies which was hired to develop the corporate identity for the
> startup I was working for. I had the fortune to look over the
> shoulders of those branding folks and I discovered that the
> methodology they use is very similar to various engineering
> methodologies. I'd like to share an outline of the experience here as
> I feel it may be useful ...
>
> First off, I arrived for my first meeting with the preconception that
> there would be a bunch of people sitting around a table throwing in
> ideas for names. I was told that nothing could be worse than doing it
> this way. It would be the equivalent of writing software by randomly
> assembling source code from a dictionary that contains all the
> function/variable names in the libraries considered for use without
> any regard for syntax and semantics, nor any idea what the code is
> supposed to do.
>
> Instead, they have a design process, not unlike a software design
> process. The first thing is to capture the requirements. Yes, there
> are requirements for a name, very surprising -- at least it was to me
> at the time -- but then it makes a lot of sense.
>
> - What is the target group?
> - What images, what impressions, what messages is the name supposed
> to communicate to the target group?
> - Which images/impressions/messages are must-have, which ones are
> nice-to-have and what priorities do they have?
> - What associations/similarities are desirable? What associations/
> similarities are undesirable/unacceptable?
>
> They produced several lists and tables with images, impressions,
> messages, associations, similarities, ordered in several ways, all
> with the aim to identify the most important goals on the one hand and
> the taboos on the other.
>
> When this was done after several meetings, I thought, "OK, now we're
> going to throw names around" but I was wrong again. Instead there was
> brainstorming about vocabulary that described one or more of the
> images, impressions, messages identified in the previous step. None
> of those words or phrases were meant to become candidates for a name.
> I would liken this step to checking out suitable libraries before you
> start writing code. You may use some of them, or you may borrow some
> stuff or some ideas from them, but they are not the end-result.
>
> Finally, that list of words and phrases was ordered yet again, color
> coded and cut down to about 100 terms. Eventually, this would be used
> to inspire actual candidate names. The candidate names would then be
> screened against the requirements and also against trademarks and any
> negative meanings in various languages. Finally, they would be
> checked against domain availability and the resulting list would then
> be rated by a panel. A shortlist of 4 or 5 would then be agreed on
> for which graphic designers would then come up with designs.
>
> I was told that it was important not to tell the decision makers in
> our organisation about the candidate names until they would be
> presented as a whole, together with the preliminary designs.
>
> It is not uncommon that the entire process described above is
> repeated several times before a short-list contains that one name
> that the decision makers are really happy with.
>
>
> HOW WE MAY APPLY SOME OF THIS
>
> Like I said, I share this experience here because I think it is
> useful to know how the professionals go about this sort of thing, but
> I don't mean to suggest that we can afford to apply the process in
> its entirety because it requires a very substantial effort and in
> some cases skills and expertise which we don't have. The branding
> team on the project I described was about 5 or 6 people, plus several
> graphic designers and legal staff working in the background.
>
> Nevertheless, I think it is worth taking a lesson or two from how the
> professionals do it and try to at least follow the same concept.
> During the last 6-8 weeks I have been working behind the scenes with
> some of you trying to do just that and this process has led to 3
> candidate names for the project. There is also a possible fourth name
> over which opinion seems to be divided between native English
> speakers and others.
>
> For the top 3, respective internet domains have been registered by
> Steve Underwood and myself in order to protect them from being
> squatted. We will assign the domain finally chosen to whatever non-
> profit organisation our community chooses to set up for the project,
> so that this organisation will have full ownership in the domain.
>
> Following the process described, we felt it would make sense to not
> reveal the candidates publicly until we have a mock-up website for
> each one as a means to present them in all their glory at which point
> we will then have to work out how we are going to vote on them. Work
> to set that up is under way.
>
> There is of course room for additional candidates should somebody
> come up with one that survives the screening process. For this
> purpose, I am going to outline below what the guiding principles have
> been to come up with the current shortlist.
>
> Please note that in this day and age, it is extremely difficult to
> find an all-English term that is not already occupied and in use for
> something similar. If we can think of it, chance is that others have
> already thought of it before us. For this reason, it is far more
> likely to find something both suitable and still available when
> borrowing from another language. Latin and Ancient Greek are usually
> the first languages people escape to but often even those terms are
> oversubscribed already or they are incredibly long or unpronouncible
> and difficult to spell and remember. In such an event, perhaps a
> different language yields a more suitable result. Sometimes removing
> one or two characters can make a word found this way more suitable.
>
>
> GUIDELINES FOR CANDIDATE NAME FINDING AND SCREENING
>
> 1) We want to establish an identity of our own, we don't wish to be
> perceived as a Wannabe-Asterisk.
>
> This means any name that hints at Asterisk should not enter the
> competition. Some examples of such names are "Ampersand", "Obelisk",
> anything with "Star" in it and anything ending in "isk".
>
> 2) We want to establish a unique identity, something of a non-generic
> nature.
>
> This means that generic names should not enter the competition. Some
> examples of generic names are "OpenPBX", "OSSPBX", "FOSSPBX",
> "FreePBX", "FreedomPBX", "OpenSwitch", "FreeSwitch", "IPSwitch",
> "SoftSwitch", you get the idea.
>
> 3) We want to convey the following images/messages ...
>
> a) really open, not just claiming to be open, community driven openness
>
> AND / OR
>
> b) application of best engineering practises and methods, commercial
> interests must not get in the way
>
> AND / OR
>
> c) the functionality of a phone system, something that manages phone
> calls
>
> Please note that it is very difficult, if not impossible to find a
> single name that can convey all of these messages. Most likely, it
> will come down to making a choice between a), b) and c). The holy
> grail is to find a word that has a hidden meaning buried inside which
> somehow relates to another goal on the list. For example, in one
> language the meaning of the word matches one goal but it is also
> similar to a common word in another language that matches another
> goal. Don't be too hard on yourself trying to find such a name. It
> should be considered a lucky accident if one stumbles upon such a name.
>
> 4) We cater for an international audience. Names which are difficult
> to pronounce or spell across a range of major languages are
> counterproductive.
>
> As a rule of thumb:
>
> a) shorter names are a plus
>
> b) more vowels are a plus, but consecutive vowels can be problematic
>
> c) names or substrings of names which mean or remind of something
> negative in a major language are taboo
>
> Examples:
>
> "Rio", "Eon", "Via" are great brand names because they are short and
> have more vowels than consonants, easy to pronounce in any language,
> easy to remember.
>
> A word like "Aeoli" is problematic because it has too many
> consecutive vowels such that it is unclear how one would pronounce it
> and it is difficult to remember the spelling.
>
> "Asterisk" is actually a somewhat problematic name because it has a
> substring "risk" which has a negative association. It is also
> problematic in a different way as it can easily be turned into a
> derogative word "A**tricks", which some people who are not so fond of
> Asterisk have been seen doing. We don't want to mention anybody by
> name here though ;)
>
> 5) We want to avoid yet another name conflict
>
> This means that anything similar to a name which has been in use in
> the realm of telephony must be ruled out.
>
> For example, Nelson Silva came up with the very nice name
> "Aspiro" (my personal all-time favourite). I think he said it means
> "sound" in Portuguese. It would make a very fine candidate for
> several reasons as it has an additional message ("aspire,
> aspiration") hidden inside which is the sort of thing brand designers
> are keen to come up with when they try to create a brand. Very
> unfortunately though, NEC has a PBX (and trademark) called "Aspire"
> which is just too close for us to be able to consider "Aspiro". A
> real shame, but that's life.
By the way, Aspiro means "aspire" or "to aspire". In one of the brainstorms, it
might have been caught out of context. "Sonido" means sound in Spanish and
"Som" in portuguese.
>
> 6) We want to be able to register a .org domain for the new name,
> either "<name>.org" or "<name>PBX.org"
>
>
> NICE-TO-HAVE
>
> 7) NICE TO HAVE BUT NOT REQUIRED -- we might be able to be listed
> alphabetically before "Asterisk"
>
> This has shown up as an accidental bonus during the brainstorming as
> quite a few suggestions happened to start with "A", such as the above
> mentioned but screened out "Aspiro". A nice side effect would also be
> that we can safely go back to AGI.
>
>
> CLOSING WORDS
>
> Items #1 to #6 conclude the guidelines we have applied to find the
> current shortlist of 3 candidates. One of the names falls into the
> "openness" category and has a hidden meaning inside, one falls into
> the "best practises" category and one into the "something managing
> calls" category.
>
> The ideal shortlist would probably be 4 or 5 items long, so anybody
> who would like to suggest an additional name to be considered, please
> apply these guidelines and if it still looks like a winner
> afterwards, contact me by email or on IRC.
>
> regards
> benjk
> _______________________________________________
> Openpbx-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev
As i already said many times, if we can get sponsors by changing names, so be
it. But remember this is a opensource and should stay a opensource.
--
Nelson Silva
-----------------------
Hotlap developer
_______________________________________________
Openpbx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev
