Over the last few years we have been seeing tools made by the user community that are named using a “TD” prefix.
That has been OK, but as the range of tools expands we have been encountering overlaps and confusion with the TD-prefixed tools that Derivative makes.
To avoid the confusion and overlap we are asking TouchDesigner users who have made, or are contemplating to make tools that start with “TD” to (re)name them to start with “TDX”, loosely meaning “TD Extension”.
We think it will be more clear to the community where the tools come from, and also avoid overlap with what Derivative produces. It may also make the tools more searchable.
Other similar naming of tools like “POPX” being an extension of “POP” is good and need not change.
If you are OK with making a name change, we don’t expect the transition to happen immediately, you can do it at a point that is convenient to you. We know some are particularly difficult to change, like established iPhone apps, so we understand it that’s not possible.
(The first emergence of TDX-named tools is TDXFam, function.store and dot.simulate’s framework to add families of operators to the OP Create dialog, announced today.)
my tool is named Embody, but it’s file extension is .tdn (“TouchDesigner Network”); would you all prefer .tdxn or a fully rebranded extension altogether (e.g. .embody)?
Sounds like a good idea going forward @greg! TDMorph would definitely fall into the category of tools you’re suggesting should be renamed.
I’m a bit hesitant, though, because it’s been around for quite a long time (seven years), so many people know it with the current name, and renaming it would mean changing references in numerous places, including many existing tutorials, as well as potentially renaming the GitHub repository, which can be a bit of a hassle.
Another consideration is that I’m about to release a new version, so changing the name now would also mean reworking a fair amount of the promotional and branding material I’ve already prepared.
So, if it’s okay with you, I’d prefer to keep the name TDMorph in this particular case. That said, if you feel strongly that the renaming should be enforced, I can of course go ahead and make the change. Let me know
@greg After checking how painful a repo migration would be, I came to the conclusion that if a rename were to happen this would be the best time, when launching a massive upgrade to the engine. So I am moving ahead with the proposed rename, and the new version will be called TDXMorph
I believe this may also be relevant to the naming of Custom C++ plugins. I’ve already developed and shared several plugins whose names describe their functionality and use the operator family as a suffix, for example: Delaunay Triangulation POP, Voronoi POP, Apple Vision Suite TOP .
Since these names don’t use the “TD” prefix, would this naming approach be acceptable, or are there any naming conventions you would prefer us to follow for Custom C++ plugins as well?
