I think we as a community can agree that it is and always has been
OCaml, not O'Caml [1,2]. But that's not going to prevent a great
number of people from making the mistake. :-( I wonder if the folks at
INRIA gave any thought to the "Irish interpretation"? (I'm quite sure
the O'Haskell people did.)

Chris

[1] http://caml.inria.fr/resources/doc/faq/general.en.html#name-case
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Objective_Caml#.22Ocaml.22_to_.22O.27Caml_programming_language.22_move
[3] http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~nordland/ohaskell/

On Nov 9, 2007 9:46 AM, Dario Teixeira <darioteixeira@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > May I suggest another name?
> > There's already Caml light.
> > In my opinion, having the name start with "ocaml" is a good idea (or
> > should even be mandatory for every ocaml-derived product).
> > It should just be followed by something that is reasonably not ambiguous.
>
> Hi,
>
> On a similar vein, has anyone noticed that "OCaml" and "O'Caml" produce
> different results in Google?  Could some (naïve) language popularity
> statistics be skewed unfavourably towards Ocaml because of this? And
> should we as a community stick to one nomenclature to avoid this problem?...
>
> Cheers,
> Dario Teixeira
>
>
>
>       ___________________________________________________________
> Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good  http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>
>