"OpenBVE" naming discussion (relative #325 and #305)

[ginga81]

At
9e626c6#diff-87f0cc57cdf329fea9aac9ffed1e84d2

Why are you changed the name 'OpenBVE' to 'openBVE'?
Especially in Japan, the naming of 'BVE' is extremely sensitive.
So, the naming is very important.

'BVE' is the category of Train Simulater for a long time we have called.
At the history, BVE2/4 calls 'BVE'.
From Bve5, the name changed to 'Bve'.
Now, we are attempt to loading the Bve5's data, but this is different approach.

OpenBVE's data is compatible with BVE2/4.
Additionally, OpenBVE is open source software.
(Now we are attempt to change BSD)
The name of openBVE is more emphasis of 'BVE'.
Surely, OpenBVE can run with BVE2/4's data and train.
But, openBVE is not based from BVE2/4.
'OpenBVE' is an one name.
Please do not sepalate from 'BVE'.

So, I suggest 'OpenBVE' at #325 .

Please description why are you decision the name of 'openBVE'.
And very deeply discuss about the naming of 'OpenBVE'.

[leezer3]

The 'correct' spelling is (probably at least) openBVE , although both have been used interchangeably in the past.

Original site from archive.org (note spelling): http://web.archive.org/web/20090415042415/http://openbve.trainsimcentral.co.uk/

This stems from the fact that in English, it's technically gramatically incorrect for a proper name / start of a sentence to start with a lower case letter, hence openBVE often gets auto-corrected to OpenBVE.

OpenBve is used in the source code due to C# CamelCase naming conventions. At this point it's rather hard to change that :)

[leezer3]

As an addendum:
I strongly suspect we're stuck with openBVE.

Changing a name is not an easy process in the first place, and there's 15 years behind this one. Complicating matters considerably is the diverse nature of the community and the sheer number of sites providing content for the sim.
It'd be impossible to get half of the active ones to refer to the 'new' name, let alone the inactive ones.....

[ginga81]

We want to use the name of 'OpenBVE'.
Surely, as you say, the original is openBVE.
But, at Japanese Bve5's community is extremely sensitive the name of 'BVE'.

Some people says that "Do not use BVE's name. openBVE is not BVE".

Also as you say, the English grammar, at the start of a sentence to start with a lower case letter is not better.
To fit the English grammar, and evacuate the trouble of naming with comunity, please change to 'OpenBVE'.

I think that the sourcecode' s OpenBve is not to problem because to obey the C# naming.

The original Bve5's history is 20 years.
And this year is Bve's 20th memorial.

Even though a half of people cannot read the new name, we want to change.
That's a very important issue.

[s520]

I have a strong interest in this argument.
I think that the designation in the document etc should be unified to " Open BVE OpenBVE". (not "openBVE")
The impact of this change on search engines is extremely limited :)

[leezer3]

I think the change would be more than you anticipate actually.

Changing from openBVE to OpenBVE (retaining the one-word structure) would have no appreciable affect, and I think would only add to the confusion.

I would agree that the immediately visible affect on search engines of moving to the two-word format Open BVE is likely to be limited to none, but the trouble is somewhat more that introducing a second word means far more potential for mis-typing, mis-spelling and so-forth.

For that matter, all three variants (openBVE , OpenBVE and Open BVE) are already used somewhat interchangeably in the wider community, and as far as I can see, the problems you're facing are all related to the use of the three letters BVE ; From 20 years of experience of this sort of argument, I can almost guarantee that the change you're advocating will get ignored totally :)

[leezer3]

Other thoughts-
If you want to refer to any of the three variants in the Japanese translations etc. you're welcome to; As noted above, they're interchangable.

It's also apparent that this is a Japanese problem; Outside Japan, the situation is almost reversed, whereby we are the 'real' thing...

For what it's worth, these were yesterday's visitor stats for the main site:

Country	Visitors
United States	1,111
China	637
United Kingdom	386
Japan	344
Hungary	326

[s520]

Oh, I'm sorry.
What I intended was a change to "OpenBVE".
Extra space was inserted by Google translation.
I know that various notations are used in the community.
I think that we should unify the official description method.

[ginga81]

'Outside of Japan, the situation is almost reversed'

Sure, it is a natural result.

Do you know who says that hope do not use 'BVE' name for openBVE?
'mackoy', the original BVE creator.
https://mackoy.exblog.jp/i4/

Also at here, mackoy says that he hope do not use logo-mark for openBVE.

So, most of Japanese BVE5's comunity people, especially 15 years or longer data creaters are extremely hate to openBVE.

At the our new works of OpenBVE, I hope that their mind are a bit changed.
This is our about four years contacting and continuing to comunicate very cafully.

As you know, 'the ORIGINAL THREE' are battled with original BVE community.
And at the 1.4.3, they are retired.
Recently, we are attacked from the older community's member again.
Because of these, all of related.

The Japanese BVE's community is operateing by mainly boss of the oldest creators.
They are continueing to create data and leading community.

Certainly, mackoy's wish (All name (with BVE) changes) is incredibly difficult, but a set of the project name of 'OpenBVE' is different 'Bve'.
OpenBVE can read the BVE2/4's data, and BVE2/4 are calls 'BVE', and now, Bve5 is not call mainly 'BVE'.
I think that the 'BVE' name is a categolize of Trainsim.
At least, set of project name of 'OpenBVE', naming head letter is 'O', so more weakly impact of English grammar, is it?
openBVE is more strongly emphasize with the 'BVE'.

From the above, a long history of Japanese BVE are very deeply problem.

But now, you are talking only using the name for a long time, and only to talking with access counter.
Perhaps, you think that bothersome with change name?

Perhaps you are not know these truth history and the truth of Japanese original BVE's comunity's.
Which is more important do you think?

Changing of the licensing is the best timing of change the logo-mark and naming.
So, I suggest at #325 (logoamark change with change to OpenBVE) and #305(licensing).

So, For the future of the project, I think strongly that change the name to OpenBVE and change the logo-mark.

• If you do not want battle with mackoy and BVE5's community, and you do not want distarb our create -

[ginga81]

I know someone who pushed bad button.
But now, we are discussing, isn't it ?
If someone who are thinking of something, if only to push bad icon, I cannot understand what is bad.
Please write.
I am not saying I want to do not use 'openbve' name, can you understand?

[leezer3]

I'm aware of the basics of the situation, although not so much in detail.

Unfortunately as noted above, my blunt assessment is that a casing change in the existing name will do absolutely nothing, and would instead just serve to confuse things further.
I would also strongly suspect that the hate would follow any changed name; Things like that are irrational that way.

So-

• At this point, we've got ~15 years of history with the current name.
• There has already been one (unsuccessful) attempt to change the name by Michelle.
• I'm by no means sure changing the name will solve your problems.
• Confusion between BVE and openBVE is relatively low.

Basically, I feel that to even consider a name change and attempt to solve your issues, we would need to make a clean break with the current.& drop the BVE moniker.
Good names are hard to come by....

[ginga81]

• At this point, we've got ~15 years of history with the current name.

SO, I always to say the timing is change to BSD.
You are obey the ORIGINAL THREE, if so, we must not change the license too, isn't it?
The Bve5's community is still notl accept and forgive, they are only give up to conversation with openBVE's community because openBVE's comunity are not understand.
If something happen again, they will angly again.
Their request is mainly two.
1.name change ->the ORIGINAL THREE choosen 'openBVE'.
After discussed, difficult to remove BVE, but changes to 'OpenBVE'.
2.logo-mark ->at the timing of change license to BSD: compedition and change.

• There has already been one (unsuccessful) attempt to change the name by Michelle.

I am not say about completely another naming.
I want to change to 'OpenBVE'. only 'o' to 'O'.

• I'm by no means sure changing the name will solve your problems.

I already know that. But the Japanese Bve5's
community is understand difficult to discuss to change completely.
So, we have to send message of "we have been experience the long history. Unfortunately, the 'BVE' cannot remove, but we are discuss and changed from the first name of 'openBVE'".

• Confusion between BVE and openBVE is relatively low.

This topic is not to say about naming confusion.
Project's naming.

After 15 years, at 1.6.0, if we will return to debian, OpenBVE is changed evolutionaly.

And I am saying that I want to change to 'OpenBVE' at the timing of change to BSD.

You say that you are understand this history.
If nothing to change, at least logo-mark, in the future, they will atack to us again, and will difficult to commit the Bve5's route parser.
I am strongly concern about that they perhaps say to us that "Must not loading Bve5's route! Because openBVE is not BVE!".

If this situation happens, what you do to us?
I hope to this concern will not happen.

[leezer3]

The trouble is that nothing is simple and easy, and everything we do has a ramification on both us and the wider community.

As noted in the other issue, I'd personally like to change to BSD, and in my view, we could probably legally do this.
On the other hand, doing so is potentially problematic without the specific written consent of the remaining member of the original three (Michelle).

Similiarly, changing the name may bring potential benefits from the Japanese community (although in my opinion most of the problems will likely follow the new name), but has to be balanced against what the current name gives us.

Is there a right and a wrong answer to either of these?

I don't really know.....

At the minute though, I really feel that you'll find out changing the casing of the current name will do absolutely nothing for your issues, but instead will just serve to add fuel to the fire of those who disagree with you.
Furthermore, it's a change which is so minor I really feel I can't support it personally....

I also suspect that your concerns over the BVE5 parser are absolutely justified, and will probably give your critics ammunition no matter what name or logo we go by.

Again, I don't have a good answer to what to do about this (other than ignoring it).

[ginga81]

As you say, our action is the very sencitive effect to the both community.
And, it is very difficult to change the project name.
So, I am waiting for the timing of change to the license to BSD.

Michelle's try of changing name is completely new and another name isn't it?
As this case, basic name is keeping, but a part of the name changed?

If Michelle changes the part of name only, but the community says no, I do not say about the name.
But, I think that Michelle tryed to the completely new name.

In the Japanese culture, at the our case of BVE community's trouble, ignoring is the worstest comunication.

Basically, such as the war, to agree with the (enemy)'s request is the worst action.
At the Japanese culture, these case is the same(such as war or law trouble etc.) .

But, when the normal culture comunication, such as BVE, if the community take someting of trouble, to show the action of something is very good effect to the community.
These action's effect name calls '誠意を見せる'.

If takes the action of with utmost effort, the another community looks all of actions.
And thinking deeply, recognize, and finally, thinking the opposite side's opinion.

And finally, if the community agreement with the part of oppsite community, they say that "your community is very deeply thought about this problem, so our community is forgive it partly,
if your community promice to our community that do not takes the same trouble again".

As you know, the community is not forgive it all, but they know all of process totally why the opposite side of community takes such action finally.

So, at the future, If the comunity's someone says 'this is a problem', the oppositeside of comunity to stops to attack.
Because, they know the problem's all of process.

Perhaps this culture is very local of Japanese, so perhaps you cannot agree with.
So, I think that you are write above.

If our community takes an action such as logo-mark changes, the Bve5's community knows all of process.
So they are not agreement with, but they are thinking of all, so they will forgives our actions.
These process is important for the future.

In our case, the openBVE comunity is continuing ignoring.
But after 15 years, at the timing of license to BSD, openBVE changes evolutionally and name is changes to OpenBVE, and changes the logo-mark by compedition.
If we takes these actions, they are looking all of process with 15 years.
They will not to say us(to 1.5' s new committers).

[leezer3]

Your cultural points are interesting; I'm intellectually aware of them, but have never really had to apply them in practice.

In Western culture, things are somewhat inverted, whereby any change on our part would / could be seen as weakness, although to be honest it's not really something that would escalate nearly as far as you're implying. If it did, it would I suppose end up with both sides agreeing some degree of a compromise after one had 'won'.......

Michelle:
She attempted to change to Trainsimframework, and this was badly rejected by the community. Some of the pushback from this was partly the reason why she left.

I haven't really got an answer to the issues, other than raising a different set of cultural issues in turn......
Whilst the logo is much more easily changable than the name, designing something that looks good is a much more difficult thing.....

Perhaps as a first step work towards a logo redesign?