Site issues, plans

[Brian Rice]

Yeah, I agree, and I don't want to play the "whose camp are we in"  
political game.

So if it's "slate language", which of the ways to write it would be  
best? Ruby has ruby-lang.org.
slatelang.org, slate-lang.org, slate-language.org.

I could always confuse things a little and talk about the "Slate  
environment" or something like that, since the language will  
eventually look less like what it is now and probably be more  
federated in some distant future. "slate-env.org", "slate-world.org",  
"slate-os.org"? :P

Maybe the solution is slate.info... argh, that's taken, too.

Marketing of the things I'm too familiar with gets on my nerves...  
hopefully someone who doesn't feel like an insider can shed some  
light on what makes sense.

On Dec 31, 2005, at 12:13 PM, Chuck Adams wrote:

> On 12/30/05, Bill Sun <billksun at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> These are also available:
>>
>> slate-smalltalk.org
>> slate-language.org
>
> Smalltalk has legacies that have turned many off in the past.  The way
> I see it, Slate is not Smalltalk, but based on it. If it diverges even
> more, I say let it.
>
> Ergo, I suggest slate-language.org.
>
> chuck

--
-Brian
http://tunes.org/~water/brice.vcf

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : /archives/slate/attachments/20051231/a9242ea1/PGP.pgp