Is it D-Bus, DBus, D-BUS or dbus?

[John (J5) Palmieri]

On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 19:54 +0900, Evan Martin wrote:
> On 7/18/06, Timo Hoenig <thoenig at suse.de> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 20:16 -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 09:06 +0900, Evan Martin wrote:
> > > > So is it going to be D-Bus, then?  I just noticed the wiki changed...
> > >
> > > Yep.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > This thread shows a trend towards using D-BUS rather than D-Bus to me.
> >
> > If you crawl the web, look at package descriptions and mail archives you
> > can see a broad usage of the term D-BUS.  Dropping D-BUS in favor of
> > D-Bus causes unnecessary confusion and mix up in my opinion.
> 
> I think which name in particular is less important than agreeing upon
> one, and John seems to be the right person to make the final decision.
> 
> If it's any consolation, popular media regularly called GNOME "Gnome",
> so it's possible an official name like D-BUS would've eventually
> migrated to mixed-case anyway.
> 
> (Now the question for me becomes what to call my bindings:  Haskell
> people often prefix with an "H", but HD-Bus looks really weird...)

You can call it HDBus, that is fine.  When we do write-ups it would be
the D-Bus Haskell bindings.  It is really more for articles, blogs and
documentation.  I was leaning to D-BUS but then Havoc said he really
didn't care and there was no reason to use the all caps.   All caps
tends to break the flow of a sentence and usually implies an acronym
which D-Bus isn't.  I just made an executive decision based on ascetics
and some marketing fun.

BTW.  There was a post by Jeff Waugh which put the GNOME issue to rest.
It is always GNOME.  GNOME started out as an acronym and though it isn't
today for historical reason it should always be written as GNOME.

--