TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Dear Oracle, Please Release the JavaScript Trademark

261 点作者 throwaway_4ever超过 2 年前

31 条评论

tomxor超过 2 年前
&gt; Yet it is obviously the right move to trade a worthless trademark for brand marketing and goodwill.<p>Just to play devils advocate... I think Oracle has so little goodwill with devs (quite the opposite), that releasing the JS trademark probably won&#x27;t even move the needle.
评论 #32713414 未加载
chrisseaton超过 2 年前
&gt; Oracle does not have any products using the trademark … Oracle doesn’t even participate in the development of any of the JavaScript engines<p>Strangely ignorant from Ryan - Oracle does maintain a JavaScript engine product - GraalJS. In fact is it possibly the only modern engine available under a commercial licence?
评论 #32713264 未加载
评论 #32712071 未加载
c3534l超过 2 年前
Could you successfully argue that its generic at this point? I strongly doubt anyone seriously thinks when you talk about Javascript, you&#x27;re talking about only products and tools made by Oracle.
评论 #32710184 未加载
gumby超过 2 年前
Can’t you just call it ECMAScript, or are they somehow different these days?<p>Guy Steele told me once that Sun registered it with ECMA so they could tell people (governments?) that it was a registered standard and that ECMA was the easiest&#x2F;fastest&#x2F;most compliant way to get there.<p>I’d always thought that ECMA was a weird place to register it.
评论 #32710247 未加载
评论 #32713619 未加载
评论 #32710188 未加载
评论 #32710169 未加载
评论 #32710876 未加载
GekkePrutser超过 2 年前
Haha asking Oracle to give up legal rights.<p>Good luck with that :) :) :)<p>PS I never understood why they called it JavaScript since it has nothing to do with Java.
评论 #32711870 未加载
评论 #32711863 未加载
评论 #32711854 未加载
评论 #32722435 未加载
robertwt7超过 2 年前
It does sound confusing. Just like the different versions of java and distributions that we have now as well.<p>I don’t think they’ll ever do it though, given the history of oracle
评论 #32710382 未加载
评论 #32710547 未加载
LeoPanthera超过 2 年前
I think this should link to here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;tinyclouds.org&#x2F;trademark" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;tinyclouds.org&#x2F;trademark</a>, not the front page.
评论 #32710498 未加载
bb88超过 2 年前
Call it WebScript or DOMScript or HTMLScript or MozillaScript or something.<p>ECMAScript is absolutely the worse name for it.
评论 #32711634 未加载
评论 #32711317 未加载
评论 #32720949 未加载
评论 #32711892 未加载
评论 #32711418 未加载
sgammon超过 2 年前
&gt; Oracle doesn’t even participate in the development of any of the JavaScript engines<p>So anyway have you heard of GraalVM
kijin超过 2 年前
Just call it JS already. Forget about the &quot;Java&quot; bit, as JS really doesn&#x27;t have much to do with Java anymore. Forget about ECMA as well -- that&#x27;s a mouthful -- though I strongly suspect that the people who design JS believe verbosity is a virtue in all of their naming schemes.<p>Just call it JS and invite the community to come up with whatever silly backronym they see fit. Just super? Jihad script? Jelly sandwich? Juniper spirit? Other languages have been doing it for decades, so why not?
评论 #32711137 未加载
评论 #32711053 未加载
graderjs超过 2 年前
Good. Nice article and nice looking blog. But should have been a private letter to let Oracle save the face of &quot;coming up with this goodwill gesture themselves&quot;.
bruce511超过 2 年前
I feel like this isn&#x27;t a problem that needs solving.<p>The existence of a trademark doesn&#x27;t prevent you using that trademark (as in referencing it like &quot;this app is written in JavaScript&quot;.)<p>Clearly Oracle is not defending the trademark, and it is likely its too late to start. Worst case they pick on you, you change your docs to say Ecmascript.<p>Frankly it&#x27;s safer where it is, than being released so the USPO or something can issue it to someone else.<p>A bigger intrinsic problem is lay-programmers confusing JavaScript with Java, and unfortunately there&#x27;s no fixing that.
评论 #32710290 未加载
评论 #32710979 未加载
评论 #32710260 未加载
评论 #32710535 未加载
评论 #32710476 未加载
rtkis超过 2 年前
I think the post needs a clarification in that ECMAScript is not a language and has nothing to do with the name JavaScript.<p>ECMA International defines a standard called ECMAScript that implementations such as JavaScript, ActionScript3 (Adobe), TypeScript and probably some more have adopted.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.risingstack.com&#x2F;history-of-javascript-on-a-timeline&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.risingstack.com&#x2F;history-of-javascript-on-a-time...</a>
adharmad超过 2 年前
It is very likely that people in the core technical teams are not even aware that Oracle owns the Javascript trademark.
评论 #32711715 未加载
ksec超过 2 年前
I hope the release their ZFS as BSD as well.
评论 #32711783 未加载
cpeterso超过 2 年前
JavaScript is trademarked and not related to Java. ECMA should adopt the name “JS”. Just JS, not an acronym. That’s what people call it anyway.
评论 #32710277 未加载
评论 #32710501 未加载
bmitc超过 2 年前
Does Oracle enforce it? If not, shouldn’t people just start using it? Haven’t people been using it anyway?<p>I’m not sure I understand what type of activities are being prevented by the trademark.
imdsm超过 2 年前
On the other hand, the community could rename its implementation of JS and go with a new approach, so long as it isn&#x27;t ECMAScript.
hnbad超过 2 年前
There seems to be some confusion in the comments.<p>The language is called JavaScript. It was temporarily called other things including LiveScript during early development. It was developed at Netscape to be the scripting language for Netscape&#x27;s browser and server (yes, you read that right). It was also the basis for a proposed competitor to CSS called JavaScript Style Sheets only ever supported by Netscape 4.<p>The trademark to the name was held by Sun prior to its acquisition by Oracle. The existence of the trademark led to Microsoft calling their reverse engineered implementation of the language &quot;JScript&quot;. In order to avoid fragmentation via incompatible implementations Netscape published an official language spec with ECMA, an international standards organization similar to ISO. Because the specification could not use the trademarked name this led to the name &quot;ECMAScript&quot; which the official specifications have used ever since.<p>ECMAScript 3 is also the basis for ActionScript 2 used in Flash by Macromedia&#x2F;Adobe, which is not fully compatible with JavaScript. ActionScript 3 was heavily influenced by the proposed ECMAScript 4, which was eventually scrapped because it tried to do too many things at once (while also intentionally being backwars-incompatible) and none of the companies involved at that point could agree on anything. This led to the heavily downscaled ECMAScript 5 release as a compromise until 2005 when ECMAScript 6 started the current model of yearly releases by defining a multi-stage process for new language features.<p>The obvious question is why it was called JavaScript to begin with. Again, there are many wrong answers in the comments. The generally accepted history is that Sun and Netscape wanted to cooperate to bring Java into Netscape as the new universal language for applications. Java was already going to be available for cross-platform desktop applications (and later for embedded applications like on feature phones) and Java applets were supposed to bring it to the browser.<p>According to various people involved at the time, Netscape&#x27;s own scripting language was considered a problem by Sun so in order to avoid competing with Java, JavaScript received its final name in order to be rebranded as a &quot;light-weight scripting language&quot; alongside the &quot;serious application development language&quot; of Java.<p>It&#x27;s also worth mentioning that JavaScript in the browser not only consists of the ECMAScript spec but also the DOM APIs, which were originally written in a language agnostic way because there was no consensus for what the default language for accessing these APIs would be. In addition to JavaScript and JScript, Microsoft also pushed VBScript (based on Visual Basic) and there were some attempts to let Java access the DOM APIs from within the JVM.<p>With Java applets being mostly dead and JavaScript having survived all other browser scripting languages, DOM spec writers have recently moved to considering JavaScript as the primary implementation language and mapping their implementation agnostic pseudo-language to JavaScript language features explicitly. This should hopefully reduce the number of language quirks in future web APIs (like the various native &quot;list&quot; types that don&#x27;t quite behave like JavaScript arrays or `document.all` being falsey).<p>So in short, JavaScript is called Java so not to compete with Java for &quot;serious browser applications&quot; in the 1990s and ECMAScript is originally a subset of Netscape&#x27;s (and later Mozilla&#x27;s) JavaScript although JavaScript has since shrunk and ECMAScript expanded (e.g. JS&#x27;s `let` and `const` outside strict mode have been superceded by ECMAScript&#x27;s more recent `let` and `const` in strict mode) to the point that both terms are used interchangeably regardless of the runtime environment.<p>If you&#x27;re wondering why Netscape went with ECMA of all places instead of something more obvious: neither the IETF nor W3C wanted to get involved in programming language specifications at the time and the ISO process took too long but there was a way to fast-track ECMA standards to ISO standards. Remember that this all happened during the peak of the browser war between Netscape and Microsoft, so this was the only thing that mattered at the time.<p>If you want to learn more about the early history of JavaScript I&#x27;d suggest reading Brendan Eich&#x27;s written history of it: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;dl.acm.org&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1145&#x2F;3386327" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;dl.acm.org&#x2F;doi&#x2F;10.1145&#x2F;3386327</a>
评论 #32757775 未加载
shmerl超过 2 年前
LiveScript would have been better.
评论 #32711280 未加载
dvh超过 2 年前
I call it JS
评论 #32711898 未加载
rafftre超过 2 年前
We can call it VanillaScript. Seems appropriate with how we generally call its usage :)
评论 #32711655 未加载
peanut_worm超过 2 年前
When can we just start calling it ECMAScript
jbverschoor超过 2 年前
jajascript. ja, because it wasn&#x27;t really complete yet<p>jaja because we keep copying over node_modules
xdmr超过 2 年前
[flagged]
dwheeler超过 2 年前
&gt; Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphising Larry Ellison. You need to think of Larry Ellison the way you think of a lawnmower. You don&#x27;t anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn, you stick your hand in there and it&#x27;ll chop it off, the end. You don&#x27;t think &#x27;oh, the lawnmower hates me&#x27; -- lawnmower doesn&#x27;t give a shit about you, lawnmower can&#x27;t hate you. Don&#x27;t anthropomorphize the lawnmower. Don&#x27;t fall into that trap about Oracle. — Brian Cantrill (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;-zRN7XLCRhc?t=33m1s" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;-zRN7XLCRhc?t=33m1s</a>)<p>Quote previously posted: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=15886728" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=15886728</a><p>:-)
评论 #32713887 未加载
评论 #32714030 未加载
评论 #32715818 未加载
Friday0722超过 2 年前
They&#x27;ve got so much badwill at this point that it would be pointless trying to get any goodwill out of this.
评论 #32710806 未加载
r12343a_19超过 2 年前
Since they trademarked Java makes sense to keep the JavaScript trademark. JavaScript was a terrible terrible name, but it is what it is...<p>This is a non-problem for the world. I never heard of this being enforced in any way.
评论 #32711557 未加载
评论 #32711585 未加载
bigmattystyles超过 2 年前
Banking on Oracle caring about goodwill is not going to be successful.
评论 #32710036 未加载
评论 #32710194 未加载
评论 #32710059 未加载
sph超过 2 年前
@dang can we update the URL to <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;tinyclouds.org&#x2F;trademark" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;tinyclouds.org&#x2F;trademark</a> instead of the blog home page?
评论 #32710924 未加载
jpswade超过 2 年前
There’s absolutely no way that Oracle would release a trademark.
评论 #32710811 未加载