Re: name Re: Dropping postgres as a whole.

Ron Peterson wrote:
> 2007-09-27_14:24:47-0400 "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>:
>
> > The reason I brought up Pg as a whole is:
> >
> > 1. It is short and sweet
>
> I think that's a problem. I think Pg might be good name for a variable
> in some code, but not in written documentation. My primary concern is
> the search engines. Google is going to be the first place many, many
> people go to look for information. Both 'PostgreSQL' and 'Postgres'
> unambiguously refer to a specific thing. For better or worse, search
> engines have a huge impact on product visibility, and even usability.
> Try searching for information on 'screen' for example.
>
> I do think it's fair to compare the merits of choosing a name based on
> its written impact vs. how it's spoken though.
>
> I wonder what the record is for the longest running listserv thread.

The problem is it isn't. ;-)

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +