Edgewall Software
Version 9 (modified by cboos, 8 years ago)

discuss pymarkup and improve the logos

In search of a better name for Markup

Many people have commented that “Markup” is a bad name for a project, mainly because it's very difficult to search for using Google et al.

This page should serve to collect the various name suggestions.

Please note that there are several aspects to the project name:

  • The project name as used in the logo, website and when referring to the project in general.
  • The name of the python package.
  • The names of distributed files and the distutils/setuptools project name (as used for PyPI and Python eggs).

Both package names and file names impose constraints on the set of potential candidates for a renaming: for example, neither support non-alphanumeric characters, or at least not in a portable manner.

“pyMarkup”

Suggested by Christian Boos  here:

pyMarkup? Pretty standard for a Python library to have a "py" prefix, and you don't really give up the Markup name. Also, would be pretty straightforward to top google results for it (54 hits so far...).

Discussion:

I'm not a fan of such prefixed names (WinFoo, KFoo, GFoo, iFoo, etc). IMHO those fall in the "cheesy" category ;-) Exceptions are bindings or Python versions of some product, but otherwise I think it's rather ugly.
-  Christopher Lenz

Yes, pySomething usually stands for the Python bindings for that Something. In the context of Markup, it was more meant to be reminiscent of the py: prefix we use everywhere in our templates. So maybe... py:markup? Additionally, this goes well with the encapsulation in <...> illustrated in the logo.
- cboos

See the comment I added at the top of the page about constraints on the project name. I actually like py:markup, but don't see how that would work as a name.
- cmlenz

Ok, then I stand for pymarkup for the project name and the package name; only the logo would be slightly different (<py:markup!> but see below for a nicer rendering). Note that this slight difference already exists for the current logo/name (<markup/> vs. Markup).
- cboos

“Markhor”

See  this post by  Matt Good to the mailing list:

In relation to the "Goat" suggestion Chris mentioned on IRC "Markhor" which is a type of goat. Incidentally the name comes from the Persian word for "snake eater", so it has a sort-of tie-in to Python. Though as Christian later that O'Reilly is using wild goats on its covers for Ruby on Rails-related books:  http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/rubyrails/

In this context, “Goat” was proposed on the thread by Ethan Fremen (“what happens to a kid when it grows up :)“.)

Well, I was actually refering to  Ruby in a Nutshell, but it appears it's the same goat ;)... -- Christian

“Upmark”

"upmark" - Suggested by David Fraser

“Papyrus”

Suggested by  Talin via email:

On the naming issue, I have a suggestion: "Papyrus". Now - one would think that there must already be a Python project with that name, it's so bleeding obvious - but a Google search for "python papyrus" turns up nothing relevant. So my suggestion is - grab the name while you can :)
~talin

... except for the fact that this name is not already used, what would be the connection?
- cboos


I like the current logo, however I thought about a small twist that would make it look even better: use a "!" instead of "/". That makes it more "dynamic".

HTML prototype: <markup!>

The "!" could even be interpreted as: "yeah, the name is markup! despite all what people are saying about its googlability and other neologisms..." ;)

HTML prototype for py:markup: <py:markup!>

Attachments