I think the reasoning behind the name change is good. And I think it's early enough that not so very much is lost by casting off the old name. I've also seen the name dbXML get confused with XmlGlobal's native xml database GoXML Db (often XmlDb for short).
The issues of confusion and friction with rdb-centric technologists and business people are legitimate (I once worked on an xml repository project that ended up being Oracle-based because of the instability we had with other solutions and because "no one ever gets fired for choosing Oracle"). While I don't think there is any danger of either rdbs or xml native dbs replacing each other, as they are each clear winners in certain problem spaces, there is a considerable overlap of problems they both solve pretty well, so there will continue to be friction. This will continue to slow the acceptance of Xml databases somewhat, regardless of taking the DB out of the name. Also: if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... These things we've come to refer to as Native XML databases ARE databases and they will have to fulfill the ACID-test and offer all the stability we come to expect from a good rdb (and if they don't, rdbs will continue to be chosen over them for many projects despite the many drawbacks of rdb-based xml solutions). Sorry, didn't mean to get on my native xml vs rbd rant...I was trying to say that I think the name change to Xindice is good as long as we don't try to get away from it being a db. Making it to be, and marketing it as, a legitimate DB is a strength and necessity, not a weakness. That being said, I think insisting on the Latinate pronunciation of the name creates unecessary marketing liabilities in certain countries (and even if there is more demand for native xml databases in Europe, the US is a very large market to write off so blithely--I'd also suggest that one reason for that situation is the ineptness, or weakness of the marketing of some of the earliest xml-centric products in the US, particularly Tamino, which whatever negative things you may have to say about it, served to do a lot of the early paving of this road--this prejudice can be self-fulfilling). I'd like to note that in many languages, people are not as insecure about adapting the pronunciation of foreign words to their own tongue as modern English speakers tend to be, and that products with English-originating names do not insist on the English pronunciation when marketing to other countries. Why not just put the name out there and let people pronounce it as comes naturally to them? Sorry for the long-windedness, Eric > > On torsdag, januari 3, 2002, at 02:56 , Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > > > lots of reasoning was placed into this but since there was a commercial > > entity named the "dbXML Group" behind the software (commercial entity > > that still exists even if doesn't perform any action), when the software > > was donated to the ASF, we asked to change the name of the project to > > avoid eventual commercial collisions. > > > > Respect! > > > Kimbro and Tom were *very* brave to bet on a name change, and the > > XIndice name might not be a great name after the 'gambling' association > > that later emerged (that's why I'd prefer people to write it "XIndice" > > instead of "Xindice", to indicate that is x-indice and not x-in-dice, > > Well how du you pronounce Linux? It spells the same, no matter if your > from Finland or US! > > > > 1) the 'dbXML group' as an existing (although idle) commercial entity > > Respect! > > > > > 2) too similar to the XML:DB name. I have already heard people naming > > one for the other. This assonance might seem stupid at first, but since > > the goal here is to convince other big players (Software AG, Oracle, > > IBM) to join the XML:DB effort and possibly move it to the JCP under an > > ASF sponsoring, it would be *MUCH* harder to convince them if there is > > too much of an assonance between the API and its proposed > > implementation. > > Ok! Then why not specify the type of db. "XIndice - XML Database" as > part of the name! Then you know what it is! > It could be part of the logo: > > X I n d i c e <- large > XML Database <- small > > > > 3) as a recent Slashdot thread showed, a name that resembles 'XML > > databases' seems to suggest to the wide majority of newbies a relational > > database which data is stored on disk as XML files!!! I was shocked to > > see that, but I was shocked when I heard the same from other (non > > XML-related) ASF members! A more neutral name allows us to avoid those > > preconcepts that would scare people away from it. > > Well dbXML is not for newbies! What about a Relational Data Base, is > that a "dating" service? > > > 4) I believe a native XML database will be much more useful in the > > document-centric XML world than it the data-centric one. 'dbXML' seems > > to suggest the opposite and will very likely create violent friction > > with the relational-based type of people that might judge the concept > > from their perception of the name, rather than from the actual contents. > > I think your wrong here! We are just in the beginning of the XML era. It > is a little to early to make this kind of jugement. We might see that > XML DataBases could replace RDBs. Time will tell! > > Is "index" a better word than "DataBase"? It make me think of a fulltext > search engine. > > > 5) XIndice is composed of an italian word, resonating with latin. > > Isn't hard to find people that understand a little latin between those > > that work in the document-centric XML communities. > > I had no idear that "Indice" was an italian word, and that it mend > "index", and I don't do Latin! > So I might be in minority. But the XML people is very well educated so > they properly understands a little Italian and Latin. > > > I have been involved in creating brands as an former advertising man. > You have to understand the values of a "brand". I live in Sweden, and > here it has been a religion for many large companies to change names > every 2 year. What they are doing is throwing away all money and trust > invested in the "old" name! To start over again!! I can see the board > of directors - now why don't we change the name of our company to > something new today? Any suggestions? .... Done! > > Your are a bunch of very good developers, and makes great products! But > that do not makes you good sales persons - does it? > > > Regards, > > Niels Peter >
