Although -we- all associate the Z in zing with a robust, well defined
protocol, a much larger section of the target population associates it
with an old and complex library protocol. And this is just a marketing
exercise in the end as we're all just mapping SRW to Z39.50 behind the
scenes.
Hence I favour SRW, with a link to zing from the home page.
Rob
On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Ray Denenberg wrote:
> Hopefully we will unveil a new (and pretty) web
> page when SRW goes public.
> It will be either: "www.loc.gov/srw" or
> "www.loc.gov/zing"
>
> If it's "zing" it will really be the srw page,
> with inconspicuous links to other zing initiative
> as well as brief lip-service about what zing
> means, but SRW (and SRU) will really be
> highlighted. The reason for considering this is
> that, as it's been noted lately, "SRW" isn't
> exactly an eye-stopper of a name (and I'm
> certainly not suggesting that we reconsider the
> name SRW). Any opinions on this?
>
> --Ray
>
--
,'/:. Rob Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
,'-/::::. http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/
,'--/::(@)::. Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
,'---/::::::::::. Twin Cathedrals: telnet: liverpool.o-r-g.org 7777
____/:::::::::::::. WWW: http://liverpool.o-r-g.org:8000/
I L L U M I N A T I
|