RE: [ebxml-mktg] ebXML name

[Daniel Feygin <feygin@unitspace.com>]

Alexei,

Regarding ebXML brand recognition: ebXML name is recognized, but it is
misconceived to represent something it does not, which means that this name
is not doing the framework and technologies represented by it any good.
There is a greater number of people to whom ebXML is potentially useful, but
who are not looking into it because of its name, than the number of people
who are aware that it is useful to them.  So by changing the name ebXML can
gain more adoptees than it can lose.  Besides, those who know what ebXML is
will not be thrown off by the name change.

Best regards,
Daniel


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexei Chirokikh [mailto:chiroka@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 5:42 PM
> To: ebxml-mktg@lists.ebxml.org
> Subject: RE: [ebxml-mktg] ebXML name
>
>
>
> I think change of name will be just waste of resources. Even we change it,
> the content will stay the same. I think we need to concentrate our efforts
> on creating a strong business emphasize of ebXML and promoting it. May be
> we need to identify certain industry segments to start with and approach
> those through participating in workshops/conferences affiliated with those
> segments.
> I think ebXML is already known as a brand name , we need to enrich and
> promote its brand awareness within industries.
>
> Regards, Alex
>
> Alexei Chirokikh, Ph.D.
> e-Business Architect, IBM Global Services
> 1630 Long Pond Road
> Rochester, NY 14626
> Voice: 1.716.720.7534  T/L: 451.7534
> Cell: 1.716.509.4869
> chiroka@us.ibm.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>                       Adam Tanton
>
>                       <atanton@oncecorp        To:       "'Daniel
> Feygin '" <feygin@unitspace.com>, "'ebxml-mktg@lists.ebxml.org
>                       .com>                     '"
> <ebxml-mktg@lists.ebxml.org>
>
>                                                cc:
>
>                       06/21/2002 09:35         Subject:  RE:
> [ebxml-mktg] ebXML name
>                       AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I couldn't agree more that the name could use some work. However,
> are we to
> far along the path to go changing the name(s) of the framework and then
> necessarily names of the specs? ebXML hasn't gotten as much press as WS,
> but
> it has gotten some.
>
> One problem I have as a consultant trying to sell ebXML to my clients is
> that because of the name they think it is just another markup
> language. And
> how can you blame them? That's exactly what it sounds like.
>
> I know as technical folks we like to think that it's the technology that
> counts and the name doesn't really matter, but we all know it matters.
>
> ebXML is:
>
> a) not descriptive
> b) misleading
>
> Cheers,
>
> Adam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Feygin
> To: ebxml-mktg@lists.ebxml.org
> Sent: 6/21/02 5:14 AM
> Subject: [ebxml-mktg] ebXML name
>
> I believe ebXML's public perception problems begin with its name.  Those
> wishing ebXML well need to realize that it is never too late to change
> it.
> I would suggest something along the lines of WS-Business - that would be
> the
> name of the framework.  WS-Commerce can be used to refer to some subset
> of
> ebXML specs.  The individual ebXML deliverables would then be called
> something like WS-Business Repository, WS-Business Processes,
> WS-Business
> Communications, WS-Business Agreements, WS-Business Language, etc.
>
> My particular choice of WS-Business vs ebXML stems from the thinking -
> whether appropriate or not - that e-business (at the core of ebXML) is
> an
> irrelevant concept, since there is nothing special from a business
> perspective about business processes that rely on computers and network
> transport rather than on people and fax machines.  The WS prefix
> indicates
> affinity to Web services technologies, which, following W3C's
> definition,
> implies only a reliance on XML, which is also the logic behind ebXML's
> current name.  "WS-" makes more obvious the complementary nature of
> ebXML to
> Web services and everything else represented by the "WS-" moniker.  From
> an
> even more purely marketing-technical standpoint, whenever another
> WS-Something spec comes out or whenever WS-I makes noise again, that
> might
> translate into some publicity for ebXML.  Finally the more popular
> Microsoft
> makes its "WS-" efforts (7 at last count, so there is much potential
> there),
> the more receptive Microsoft's audience is going to be to ebXML.
>
> In terms of making the transition go smoothly, perhaps the new name
> could be
> applied to the suite of approved 2.0 specs.  That would reflect the
> growing
> maturity of the framework, minimize the negative impact of the name
> change,
> and justify any required incompatibilities with previous spec versions.
>
> Daniel