Actually, i would argue that academic conferences tend to be more
idiosyncratically named (usually involving acronyms) than
"conventional." For example, the ones i've been to recently are:
CHI, SIGGRAPH, CSCW, HICSS, AAA, ASA, Sunbelt, AOIR, Ubicomp, WWW,
I3D, InfoVis, LITA, PSI... Smaller non-annual workshops tend to have
descriptive names (particularly in the humanities) but most of the
big annual ones are short-hand or acronyms. They also often stand
for the "community" name. For example, SIGGRAPH is "Special Interest
Group in Computer Graphics" and PSI is "Performance Studies
International" and AAA is "American Anthropological Association" and
AOIR is "Association of Online Internet Researchers." So the
conference is named the same as the association.
One thing to note: in academia-land, anything ending with -expo, -
world, -con, is perceived as industry-focused and is eschewed by
academics.
danah
On Jan 3, 2006, at 1:56 PM, Ivan Krstic wrote:
mysekurity wrote:
Should it be formal or informal? Who is our
target audience?
There seems to be a lot of interest in attracting strong academic
participation, so we might want to think about aiming for a more
conventional name.
--
Ivan Krstic <krstic(a)fas.harvard.edu> | 0x147C722D
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
- - - - - - - - - - d a n a h ( d o t ) o r g - - - - - - - - - -
"taken out of context i must seem so strange"
musings ::
http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts