Wikipedia link

Skip to first unread message

Markus Gattol

May 24, 2011, 6:04:54 PM5/24/11
to Colony Users
I just stopped by at #colonyframework before bed and read up on a
discussion where was

Gosh, didn't think about asking wikipedia about colony so far but then
also, does not mention it when imo it should. I
think Colony's biggest problem is that folks don't quite understand
what category (web framework, interpreter, standard, etc.) it belongs
to when they first encounter it; the wikipedia article does a great
job in removing those clouds.
Message has been deleted

Tiago Reis

May 24, 2011, 6:37:05 PM5/24/11
One thing that may help the confusion on what is Colony Framework is
exactly the last word on its name: 'Framework'.

Usually framework is associated to a concret implementation / software
and not a spec. Have you guys considered removing Framework from the
name and leave it only "Colony".

Probably you did, but it can do any harm to ask :)


Tiago Reis

Luís Martinho

May 24, 2011, 7:21:15 PM5/24/11
The Wikipedia article is in a more dry, encyclopedic tone than the docs. It's also more objective.
Most of the times I prefer to read Wikipedia first, even before taking a look at the technology's official website. Less bias.

Usually projects don't link to Wikipedia, people just assume that if it's relevant enough there must be an article for it.
So I'm not really sure if one should link, even a quote in the documentation may look a bit pretentious, imho.

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:04 PM, Markus Gattol <> wrote:

Luís Martinho

May 24, 2011, 7:24:42 PM5/24/11
It's a framework spec, so I don't feel it's misleading.

Besides, you have to think about SEO.
Doesn't exactly make you feel special, right?

But hey the django people passed the guitar player long ago, so hey, I could be wrong.

Cheers all, glad to have you with us Tiago.

João Magalhães

May 24, 2011, 8:07:01 PM5/24/11
Tiago you're right. Saying that Colony is a framework and then stating that it is indeed a spec is probably confusing.
The best solution (my opinion) is to clearly separate the concept colony spec from the implementations colony framework, just like python did: CPython vs Python Programming Language.
As for branding proposes I would keep the Colony framework brand as it is more explicit and because for most of the people the spec vs implementation thing is just a detail, they just want to solve their problem.

Welcome aboard

Tiago Reis

May 25, 2011, 6:00:51 AM5/25/11
Regarding Wikipedia links in official documentation, I think that it
is better to keep it out. My main reason is that including in the
official docs something that you don't control is not the best way.
Imagine if Wikipedia goes down (a million souls cry in dismay :p ) or
the wikipedia nazis decide to remove the article, then you have an
official documentation that leads to no where, which doesn't look very
"professional" in my opinion.

@ João : Would it really be that bad if the spec was called 'Colony
Framework Spec'? And then you can have the official implementation
named Colony Framework. This way it would be possible to keep
Framework in it's name, and reduce the confusion induced by the name.

Thanks for the welcome messages :)

2011/5/25 João Magalhães <>:

Tiago Reis

João Magalhães

May 25, 2011, 6:20:01 AM5/25/11
That's exactly what I was thinking, clear separation of concepts. Two names for two different things.
But the main name (marketing), the one to be used for common usage would be colony framework.

What do you think ?
Best approach ?

Markus Gattol

May 25, 2011, 6:27:40 AM5/25/11
to Colony Users
Ok, guys, you're right, I agree for the mentioned reasons that linking
to the Wikipedia article is no good. Folks will find it themselves and
yes, I am too starting with the wikipedia article about whatever I
encounter for the first time so it's all right.

About the distinction of names, spec vs. framework. I am +1 on keeping
things as they are now i.e. colony framework is ok imo.
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages