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@fas.harvard.edu | 0x147C722D _______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@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