results from

[Sebastian Sauer]

On 11/21/2011 02:39 PM, Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:
> On 21 November 2011 13:50, Pierre Stirnweiss<pstirnweiss at googlemail.com>  wrote:
>>>> 1. Abacus  (Condorcet winner: wins contests with all other choices)
>>> Even if it won the competition it is a bad choice as there is already a
>>> spreadsheet application out there with this name. See
>>> http://www.freebsdsoftware.org/deskutils/abacus.html
>>>
>> If there is already a spreadsheet application with this name, then this is
>> an absolute no-go for me. How would we feel if some other project was
>> developping an application suite with:
>> YetAnotherApplicationSuite Words: text processor
>> YAAS Stage: presentation
>> YAAS Kexi: DB
>> YAAS Krita: painting
> If Kexi or Krita was dead already for 10+ years I see no problem and I
> see n o reason why I'd have (and how?) to 'block' the name. Especially
> that Kexi is a popular name in China.

My previous mail contains links which show that it's still in 
developement in 2011.

> Come on, as we mentioned the project is abandonware now. Or maybe will
> this move also hurt xabacus?
> Even if yes or if the abacus spreadsheet was vital, I feel a need to
> define limits to this 'correctness' and be consistent, see that Words
> breaks the law too: equally 'popular' app (as the Abacus) is called
> Words and yet it is _more_ alive: http://freecode.com/projects/words.
> There is also http://freecode.com/projects/plan and
> http://freecode.com/projects/spread.
>

At least in germany afaik there is a difference between "Eigennamen" and 
"common names" in use. So, you cannot trademark "Words" (and Microsoft 
cannot trademark "Word") but you can trademark the whole brand which is 
Calligra Words.

iirc that was even our explicit motivation. Means we liked to use common 
names giving an idea about the usage in the same way e.g. OO.org and 
iWork did and then trademark the common name Plan, Words, Stage, Tables 
use which is Calligra. So, just using "Tables" or "Words" is exactly not 
what we liked to have but they should always be named Calligra Words and 
Calligra Tables.

That is at least how I keeped it in memory. Maybe others understood it 
different?

> In order to be nice one can ask given project maintainer(s) in subject
> to see if they care. It's now turn of Tables contributors, also your,
> Sebastian as through contributions you're obviously entitled to decide
> while I was entitled to propose. So to be constructive I proposed (not
> decided in any way) some option that somewhat match and can be spelt
> correctly by most people.  Please do so and everyone will be happy
> because the best way to pick a name is to hear it from contributor in
> the first place. I am sorry for misunderstanding and using vote
> instead of poll term.
I would like to start with defining the problem. That was greatly done through I personally do not agree with the result that a renaming is needed. I mean for the same reason we would need to rename Words cause ppl may confuse it with a "Count words" menu-item in Tables and we would need to rename Plan cause there may a "Planing resource" plugin.

Personally I agree 100% with Thorstens conclusion on this for the specific problem described with Kexi ("Export to Tables"). Kexi should not use the applicaton-name but the format-name cause that menu-point does not only "Export to Calligra Tables" but does "Export to OpenDocument Spreadsheet" what includes OO.org/LO/MSOffice.

The problem that sometimes in the communication between us Calligra-Tables and tables-in-words are exchanged is not so easy to solve. I guess people will create bugreport writing "Tables not load" or will ask quesitons like "Why using tables crashes" (does he/she means Calligra Tables or using tables in Words?). That's indeed a problem that (Calligra) Tables maybe does not share with Words (thanks to the "s" at the end) or Stage.

*If* we agree that a rename is needed, then we could propose names. Personally I found "Spread" or "Spreads" not bad either. It fits the "common not-standalone name" idea while still being unique enough. But there are probably even better names that say something about the functionality Tables offers. So, something that makes clear it's about calculations, formulas, dealing with "numbers" (damn you Apple :-) and so on.

We could brainstorm a bit and create a list out of that. I think when we do so no voting is needed (was there one needed for the "Calligra" name?). I guess at the end people would agree that it's a good finding, be happy and unicorns would jump over rainbows.