From owner-freebsd-doc Fri Dec 7 12:25: 7 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A59B437B419 for ; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:25:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42779BE82; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:25:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA28473; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:25:03 -0800 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.3) id fB7KOie19434; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:24:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: Raf_Schietekat@ieee.org Cc: doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: X-Windows References: <3C102234.6040100@skynet.be> From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 07 Dec 2001 12:24:43 -0800 In-Reply-To: <3C102234.6040100@skynet.be> Message-ID: Lines: 43 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Raf Schietekat writes: > If this is not the appropriate address for this kind of message, please > excuse me, and let me know where I should have sent it. Seems OK to me. > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/x-understanding.html > >>>>> > ``X Windows'' is to be avoided wherever possible; see X(1) for more > information. > > <<<<< > > The link for X(1) http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=X&sektion=1 > does not work. That should be http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=X&manpath=FreeBSD+Ports I wonder why X(1) is in file man3/X.3.gz on my FreeBSD 4.4-R. > The reader is led to expect the reason to avoid "X Windows" at the other > end of the link, but "man X" on 4.4_RELEASE only provides a list of > allowed forms, and no confirmation of my assumption that it's because > Microsoft made "Windows" a trademark, even though "X-Windows" used to be > the normal name for the "X Window System" (was it? is my assumption > correct?). The quoted statement is overblown in my opinion. AFAIK, the only reason for it is that the term is commonly used, but not sanctioned by the X Consortium. Also for the same reason brown suits are to be avoided whenever possible -- it's not fashionable and it's use is not advisable if you want to join the fashionable clique. BTW, I'm quite sure people were saying "X Windows" before M$ innovated the term Windows, but I don't think it was ever the "normal" name for X. I have a book from 1989 which says the original name was "X" (a prior window system was "W"), The book seems careful to only use the approved forms and I doubt that they were worrying about the Windows trademark then. It might be a consideration now, but I doubt even M$ would have the nerve to complain about a common name for the window system of Motif, a standard they helped innovate. It wouldn't suprise me, though. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message