[__ryan__]

> Edit: also, searching for "prolog web framework" gets you stuff about using prolog for web application development. So, yeah, naming is not great and your assertion is not entirely correct.

Is this a typo? I would certainly hope that a search for "prolog web framework" would not include results about a web framework written in Nim named "Prologue"

"Prolog" and "prologue" are completely different words with different meanings-- they are only homophones. It's not really analogous (at all) to the Firebird situation where the names of the projects had the exact same name, same spelling and all.

If this project were named "Sea", do you think people would conflate it with the "C" programming language?

[planetis]

> Is this a typo? I would certainly hope that a search for "prolog web framework" would not include results about a web framework written in Nim named "Prologue"

Unfortunately not. It's caused by fuzzy matching and happens with other words (and languages) too. Annoying but I don't think we should start avoiding certain words because google search (and some people apparently) can't make the distinction.

[__ryan__]

Re-read what the comment I replied to said:

> searching for "prolog web framework" gets you stuff about using prolog for web application development ... And no sniff of this new framework.

The comment I replied to described that they searched for "prolog web framework", which is NOT the name of this project. The name of this project is "prologue".

"prolog" != "prologue"

Searching for "prolog web framework" should not return results about the "Prologue" web framework. What the commenter I replied to described is the correct behavior.

Edit: I understand that contrived searches might be constructed to fall victim to fuzzy matching, but what the comment I replied to confirmed is that it's probably not an issue in this case.

[memsom]

Well they are, but they aren't. They are both pronounced the same and if I hear one, I could easily mistake the other. If someone tells me about this "prologue web framework" I could easily transliterate that as "prolog". Also - fuzzy search as mentioned.

"Sea" and "C" are not the same ballpark. "Prolog" is a subset of "Prologue." This is more like "C" and "C#", and I can tell you that it is actually a problem.

[__ryan__]

> Also - fuzzy search as mentioned.

So was your edit on the comment I replied to (repeated below) a typo?

> Edit: also, searching for "prolog web framework" gets you stuff about using prolog for web application development. So, yeah, naming is not great and your assertion is not entirely correct.

This is an anecdote in favor of fuzzy search not really being an issue.

> If someone tells me about this "prologue web framework" I could easily transliterate that as "prolog".

If someone told me about that “C programming language” I could easily transliterate that as “sea” or misremember it as “B”.

These are contrived situations. Imagine someone told me about “Prologue: a web framework written in Nim”, and I transliterated that to “prolog web framework”. If I searched that and it didn’t come up with a web framework written in Nim, I would think critically about the issue and change my search to “prolog web framework Nim” and would find this project.

It would be so silly to change the name or avoid the name of a completely unrelated project when ideally anyone faced with the issue would have the critical thinking skills to adjust and refine their search terms so it was not an issue.

[memsom]

The edit? No. Why would it be a typo? You assume everyone's first language is English, right?

So, it really depends on your search engine. Using 3 different ones, assuming my English spelling is less than stellar, only looking at the first page:

"Prolog Web framework"

Duck Duck Go/ Bing/ Google: all prolog

"Prologe Web framework"

Duck Duck Go: 5th hit is Prolog based

Bing: 7th hit is prolog

Google: first hit prolog

So yeah - there is a possibility of confusion.

> If someone told me about that “C programming language” I could easily transliterate that as “sea” or misremember it as “B”.

If you knew nothing about programming and technology. I counter that if someone told be about "Prologue" I would assume "Prolog". I wonder why "Nim" would come in to it? I don't know about you, but I don't go around saying "I wrote apps in MFC in C++ in the 90's", or "I write ASP.Net applications in C#". I think the framework stands alone, surely? The language is an implementation detail, and I guess Prologue might one day be ported to another platform if it is really all that good?

The issue is that your position is people something like - should be intelligent enough to know what is meant by a phrase. My position is that you are massively underestimating the issue with the words basically looking and sounding the same. Your attempt at a counter is a weak argument about how people might dramatically misremember facts anyway.

I think I looked at your history, and this is not the first time you got in to a debate like this, so I'm out... it's a bad name - the creator should probably rethink it or prefix "Nim" to make it unique, but whatever.

[__ryan__]

> The edit? No. Why would it be a typo? You assume everyone's first language is English, right?

No, I was asking if it was a typo because I interpreted it as being a counter-point to the point you were trying to make. Here it is again, emphasis mine:

> Edit: also, searching for "prolog web framework" gets you stuff about using prolog for web application development. [...] And no sniff of this new framework.

I interpreted this as being critical of fuzzy matching, but I realize now you may have been giving an example of a transliteration a hypothetical searcher would make themselves, which makes more sense. Since what you described is what I consider to be the ideal behavior of a search engine, I thought it was possibly you meant to say "also, searching for 'prologue web framework'". I'm sorry I misunderstood.

> The language is an implementation detail [...]

I don't personally agree with this. If the language is important to the project (in this case, it is since this is a web framework for Nim), I would probably make a point to add that context.

> I think I looked at your history, and this is not the first time you got in to a debate like this, so I'm out...

Sincerely asking (it sounds snarky but I don't know how else to ask): is there something wrong about the way I'm arguing my position? I am not trying to be rude or anything, I just sincerely disagree. Would it be better if I just conceded or simply stopped responding?

> it's a bad name - the creator should probably rethink it or prefix "Nim" to make it unique, but whatever.

Disagree. I suppose it's my fault for arguing what clearly comes down to your opinion.

Edit:

> My position is that you are massively underestimating the issue with the words basically looking and sounding the same.

I totally understand the hypothetical issues that can come up in this kind of situation.

My position is simply that in this case the arguments against using this name are contrived and furthermore are resolved with the slightest pinch of context.