incubator-odf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: "Apache ODF Toolkit" versus "The Apache ODF Toolkit"
Date Thu, 26 Jan 2012 08:35:50 GMT

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:robweir@apache.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 09:40
> To: odf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: "Apache ODF Toolkit" versus "The Apache ODF Toolkit"
> 
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 08:48
>> To: odf-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> 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
>> 
> 


Mime
View raw message