Since there’s been some confusion lately about what the naming conventions for the t2cr should be I propose some specific guidelines to the Name A proposal.
Let us assume there are two types of tokens: Governance tokens Utility tokens Guideline 1 If the token is a governance token or clearly will be in the future, it should carry the name of the project. If the token is a utility token and the only token that, to the best of your knowledge, will be issued by the respective project it should be named after the project. If the token is a utility token and one of multiple tokens (to be) issued by the same project, it should be named such that it is distinct and most clearly represents it’s use case. If the token is both a governance token and utility token, it should carry the name of the project. This should cover most if not all cases. Rationale
Most people more easily identify tokens by their respective projects than by their actual token names. This is especially true for new people in the ecosystem.
- Suffixes such as, but not limited to: “Token”, “Coin” should generally be avoided, unless a name with suffix is already well established.
- Names should be treated like brand names (spelling wise). This means that the correct spelling is dictated by the project owners, unless consensus forms around a different spelling.
Current examples in the t2cr are:
- aelf -> NOT Aelf
- 0x -> NOT zeroX
- SingularityNET -> NOT SingularityNet
I’d love to get some feedback on what the community thinks about this proposal. If you think I clearly missed something please let me know . This proposal is just a rough draft and I will formalize it a bit more if we put it up to a vote.