Re: www/mosaic

"Peter Lister, Cranfield Computer Centre" <>
Message-id: <>
Subject: Re: www/mosaic
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 24 Nov 93 14:11:58 GMT." <>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 93 15:39:39 GMT
From: "Peter Lister, Cranfield Computer Centre" <>

Lou Burnard sez
> What's wrong with calling it "The Web"? (the "world wide" part is a bit
> unnecessary). People talk about the network-based activities as "the
> Net" (including both Internet and say Listserv-type things under this
> heading), so you can point out that a Web is a bit more precisely
> organized than a net. One important difference is that a web has a centre,
> which applies to the Web as people actually experience it -- you have
> to start with a home page somewhere.

What's wrong is that it doesn't change the idea of a generic term used
specifically. Everything I opined about applies if you subsitute "The
Web" for "World Wide Web", with the exception of the "World wide" bit,
which (as you say) irrelevant.

I generally take "The Net" to mean what you do - the Internet and those
other nets easily accessible to it by email. If I say "networking" to a
student here, he will assume I mean the campus Ethernet (and probably
just the network served PCs), unless he's from the Cranfield School of
Management, in which case he will assume I mean the process of
cultivating useful business contacts. It doesn't help me to identify
the Internet to them, especially if they haven't come across it before.

Arnold Bloemer sez

> I critized the lack of a single speakable and easily remembered term
> one year ago. The curent situation in WWW is a horror scenario for
> everybody who has some knowledge about Corporate Identity.

Thank you Arnold; "coporate identity" is just the buzz-phrase I was looking for. :=)

Rich Wiggins sez

> It's not clear what the wisest course of action might be, with all the
> terms you list in common use; neither World-Wide Web nor Mosaic should
> be renamed. But it would be useful to consider minimizing of jargon and
> collapsing of terms visible to users whenever possible.  For instance,
> yesterday someone I know who is quite savvy in Gopher and WAIS was
> feeling his way along with Mosaic and the Web; he said he kept wanting
> to be able to quickly "gopher" elsewhere.  He did not know what "Open URL"
> would do; that revelation alone opened things up.  Would "Open Network
> Resource" be more inviting?  What's obvious to a wizard isn't to a newbie.

I would have said that "Go to..." was even better.

As to renaming WWW, I agree that a revolution would be *really*
confusing. But introducing an official nickname would be reasonable -
more and more people would get used to it and eventually the original
full title would be forgotten (who, for instance, can name the title of
the Elgar's march that we all think of as "Land of Hope and Glory" off
the top their heads?)

I think that Rich made a very good point - his user wanted 'to quickly
"gopher" elsewhere'. He easily "verbised" the noun, and we all
understand what he meant. No one would naturally coin the verb "to
world wide web". Would they? Doesn't trip of the tongue. People might,
however be tempted "to Boris" elsewhere, (keeping the spider Motif).

I feel a competition coming on. Of course, the problem is finding a
cute name that hasn't yet been appropriated for something else. This
seems already to be a problem in the car (auto) market, to judge by
some the monikers that have been attached to recent models.

My entries

* Boris		(the spider)
* IncyWincy	(*too* cute?)
* HyLite	("Highlighted hypertext") - this must exist already, surely?
* HyRoad

Doubtless we'll think of more.

Peter Lister                             Email:
Computer Centre, Cranfield University    Voice: +44 234 754200 ext 2828
Cranfield, Bedfordshire MK43 0AL UK        Fax: +44 234 750875
--- Almost (but not quite) entirely unlike tea ---