| ▲ | riazrizvi 5 days ago |
| Why not “JS”? Then we can all take sides in a religious war on whether it’s pronounced jay-ess, jayce, juss, or jess? |
|
| ▲ | FearNotDaniel 5 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| It’s pronounced gay-ess. Just like GIF. |
| |
| ▲ | junga 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Sorry, this seriously is an honest question: Is there a typo in your post? Otherwise I must come to the conclusion that you suggest pronouncing JS as 'jiss'. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | hnlmorg 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| JS would be hard to trademark now because there’s so many other services using JS as part of their trademark. There’s also already quite a few companies who’ve already registered JS as a trademark. You also couldn’t call it Jscript because Microsoft owns the trademark there. EMCAScript is the most practical from a legal standpoint, but that name sucks badly. |
| |
| ▲ | moralestapia 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Yeah, but that's what is needed. An un-trademark-eable term. | | |
| ▲ | hnlmorg 5 days ago | parent [-] | | What you need is the opposite: a trademarked name but one where a community-managed nonprofit foundation owns. That’s how other languages (eg Perl and Python) manage their assets. And the ecosystem is better for it. | | |
| ▲ | moralestapia 4 days ago | parent [-] | | >Perl >Python >And the ecosystem is better for it. AHAHAHAHAHH | | |
| ▲ | hnlmorg 4 days ago | parent [-] | | I take it form your reply that you either misunderstood my comment or you think the constant threat of litigation from Oracle is a good thing. Either way, you come off as incredibly naïve. |
|
|
|
|
