Dear all, Following it is my opinion on this matter. Changing a bad name for a bad name is not a good decision. And C3IM is a bad name (at least there is lot of references to FIWARE NGSI in certain fields like Smart Cities) ... Neither NGSI nor C3IM are meaningful to anyone. BTW, this is a problem with most acronyms. C3IM may look like a better acronym but still a bad acronym. The fact that ETSI seems to have "restrictions" and for instance name ISGs based on 3-letters acronyms should not prescribe what name we give to the API. Names are quite a strategic and looking for a name has to be thought carefully. That's why it would be relevant to hear the opinion of the marketing team on this matter. IMHO, we have to go for a name that says something to developers (and better if to anyone) and can be marketed easily. We then can explain that its specs is relatd to the C3IM ISG at ETSI or whatever, but that would be second-level explainations. Why don't go for something like "Context API" or "Context Broker API" ? Simple, meaningful ... and there is no such API name out there. And if it is too generic we should go for something like ContextMan or equivalent. Again, simple, meaningful for any newcomer which doesn't care about ETSI. One advantage, on the other hand, would be that if our API starts to get known, then we would be able to occupy a space first than other. One good argument is that in last year "Hypecycle Report" by Gartner, they introduced "Context Brokering" as a cornerstone concept in development of future smart solutions. So choosing "Context Broker API" or "ConextBroker API" would put us in the first position in the race to become the "Context Brokering" API of reference. Again, a point about which we should seek the advise of marketing experts (although of course, tech guys we have to validate whatever recommendation they give). I can move this action. Best regards, Juanjo On 15/09/2017 11:39, gilles.privat at orange.com wrote: > > Dear François, Clara, all > > I am sorry I have to disagree publicly (in a friendly way J) with my > colleague François on this > > I understand it is a difficult and potentially unsettling message to > convey to our users, but there are many compelling arguments for > dropping NGSI completely in favor of C3IM. You may remember we > started the technical discussion behind this at the end of 2015 > within FI-CORE, and it is certainly a problem that it took so long to > converge, but the ETSI CIM group had to get started to become the > engine of this transition. > > To focus here just on the NAMING issues, (assuming we all agree on the > rationale for the actual transition from NGSI to C3IM, and we will > have to come up with a presentation and memo expounding all the strong > TECHNICAL justifications for this transition) : > > ·NGSI is a meaningless and vacuous acronym > > ·it refers to an obsolete telecom-centric standard for which FIWARE > was the only user ever > > ·we are, as you all know, not compatible anymore with the original OMA > NGSI standard… > > By contrast > > ·C3IM is a new standard that will have an ETSI stamp, with strong > backing from the Commission and a group of ISG partners extending > beyond FIWARE > > ·C3IM does have a meaning, by contrast to NGSI (see attached 2 slides) ! > > ·The technical choices behind C3IM make it possible for FIWARE to > deliver on and enlarge its promise of openness, and we have to > advertise this strongly through this new name > > ·C3IM relies on a future-proof data model that is both easily > understood by practitioners (“property graphs” , as used in graph > databases) and compatible with RDF and linked data and we also have to > advertise this by this new name > > *De :*fiware-technical-committee-bounces at lists.fiware.org > [mailto:fiware-technical-committee-bounces at lists.fiware.org] *De la > part de* francois.richard at orange.com > *Envoyé :* vendredi 15 septembre 2017 10:49 > *À :* Pezuela, Clara; José Manuel Cantera; > fiware-technical-committee at lists.fiware.org > *Objet :* Re: [Fiware-technical-committee] Feedback needed Name of > Context Information Management API > > I totally agree with Clara. Confusion has to be avoided. Why it I not > possible to keep NGSI with a new definition of acronym? > > François RICHARD > > Orange Smart Cities > > Directeur des Partenariats et de la Réglementation > > *ORANGE GARDENS* > > 44, avenue de la République > > CS 50010 > > 92326 CHÂTILLON Cedex > > www.orange.com <http://www.orange.com> > > Mob : +336 07 04 25 90 > > Mail : francois.richard at orange.com <mailto:francois.richard at orange.com> > > *De :*fiware-technical-committee-bounces at lists.fiware.org > <mailto:fiware-technical-committee-bounces at lists.fiware.org> > [mailto:fiware-technical-committee-bounces at lists.fiware.org] *De la > part de* Pezuela, Clara > *Envoyé :* vendredi 15 septembre 2017 10:13 > *À :* José Manuel Cantera; fiware-technical-committee at lists.fiware.org > <mailto:fiware-technical-committee at lists.fiware.org> > *Objet :* Re: [Fiware-technical-committee] Feedback needed Name of > Context Information Management API > > Dear Jose Manuel, > > FIWARE is now quite identified with NGSI, and we are using such word > everywhere when we talk about FIWARE. Don’t you think that change of > name will be initially confusing? I am not saying I don’t understand > the change and that things have to evolve, but I would take care of > how we communicate the message and be sure that we are doing well the > transition from one word to another word to avoid people got lost or > that they perceive a wrong message. > > Here my two cents > > Best regards > > Clara Pezuela > > Head of IT Market > > Research and Innovation Group > > ARI booklet > <https://atos.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/atos-ari-2016.pdf> > > Atos Spain SA > > Clara.pezuela at atos.net <mailto:Clara.pezuela at atos.net> > > +34 675 62 9974 > > cid:7206F4B45C675D4FA60A576B4DAED2AE at mail.sis.atos.net > > *From:*fiware-technical-committee-bounces at lists.fiware.org > <mailto:fiware-technical-committee-bounces at lists.fiware.org> > [mailto:fiware-technical-committee-bounces at lists.fiware.org] *On > Behalf Of *José Manuel Cantera > *Sent:* Friday, September 15, 2017 8:57 AM > *To:* fiware-technical-committee at lists.fiware.org > <mailto:fiware-technical-committee at lists.fiware.org> > *Subject:* [Fiware-technical-committee] Feedback needed Name of > Context Information Management API > > Dear all, > > There is a formal proposal on the table (currently supported by ETSI > and Orange) of naming the Context Information Management API as *C3IM. > (Cross-Cutting Context Information Management). *Nice thing about this > proposal is two-fold: > > A/ It keeps the letters C,I,M in the letters but at the same time > avoids colliding with “CIM” a very overloaded acronym. > > B/ It is pronounced similarly to CIM if you see the “3” as en e ;) > > C/ It has the word “Context” in it > > So, it seems to meet various requirements. This is an important > decision that may affect FIWARE in the future as, if this initiative > succeeds, then no longer it will be talked about FIWARE NGSI but about > C3IM. > > So, please send us your feedback as soon as possible. We can deal with > this during next TSC, (don’t know whether we have one next Monday) > > Many thanks, Best > > This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended > solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive > this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy > it. > As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos group > liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although the > sender endeavors to maintain a computer virus-free network, the sender > does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and will not be > liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. > > Este mensaje y los ficheros adjuntos pueden contener información > confidencial destinada solamente a la(s) persona(s) mencionadas > anteriormente y pueden estar protegidos por secreto profesional. > Si usted recibe este correo electrónico por error, gracias por > informar inmediatamente al remitente y destruir el mensaje. > Al no estar asegurada la integridad de este mensaje sobre la red, Atos > no se hace responsable por su contenido. Su contenido no constituye > ningún compromiso para el grupo Atos, salvo ratificación escrita por > ambas partes. > Aunque se esfuerza al máximo por mantener su red libre de virus, el > emisor no puede garantizar nada al respecto y no será responsable de > cualesquiera daños que puedan resultar de una transmisión de virus. > > _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc > pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler > a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, > Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; > they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. > Thank you. > _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc > pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler > a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, > Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. > > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; > they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. > Thank you. > > > __________________________________________________________________________________________ > > You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies on the following links: > - http://forge.fiware.org/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fiware/index.php/FIWARE_Privacy_Policy > - http://forge.fiware.org/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fiware/index.php/Cookies_Policy_FIWARE > > Fiware-technical-committee mailing list > Fiware-technical-committee at lists.fiware.org > https://lists.fiware.org/listinfo/fiware-technical-committee > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-technical-committee/attachments/20170918/1d935b21/attachment-0001.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 4796 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-technical-committee/attachments/20170918/1d935b21/attachment-0001.jpg> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 21019 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-technical-committee/attachments/20170918/1d935b21/attachment-0001.png>
You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy