Change the Name of the Project to the More Grammatically Correct "Corrupt Word DOCX Checker"

[socrtwo]

Word Corrupt DOC Checker sounds clumsy. This is probably because adjectives need to follow a certain order, see: http://www.gingersoftware.com/content/grammar-rules/adjectives/order-of-adjectives/[http://www.gingersoftware.com/content/grammar-rules/adjectives/order-of-adjectives/](url). Here "Corrupt" is a quality (#2 on the list), which should be in front of "Word" which is a proper adjective (#7) which properly precedes I think "DOC" which I think is a purpose or qualifier (#8 in the list order).

If the program can only work with DOCX files, the program should replace DOC with DOCX. If it works with other variants like the macro enable DOCM files, perhaps the long form, "Document" should be reintroduced, but this may be a matter of taste.

Finally Microsoft has grammar guidelines which say that when referring to Word, see: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/trademarks/usage/publications.aspx[https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/trademarks/usage/publications.aspx](url). This sentence "You may not:
use the Marks as the leading word or most prominent element in your publication, seminar, or conference title;" may be applicable to "Word Corrupt DOC Checker" which starts with "Word" clearly referring to "Microsoft Word" as its leading word.

[desjarlais]

I could probably use either of these:

1. Corrupt Word DOCX Checker
2. Corrupt Word Document Checker
3. Corrupt Word Document (DOCX) Checker

You are correct, the existing name is very clumsy. I'll keep this open and workshop this a little while and see if I can come up with a better name. I'm leaning towards 2, but I like the idea of explicitly calling out it only works for the open xml format document.

[socrtwo]

You could use Corrupt Word DOCX Document Checker without the parenthesis. Any of them is fine. You could expand the scope and include DOC text salvaging using this command line app: http://silvercoders.com/en/products/doctotext/. That's what I did in several iterations of my corrupt Word document salvaging/fixing programs. Best Wishes, Paul D Pruitt socrtwo@s2services.com (301) 493-4982 9006 Friars Rd. Bethesda, MD 20817-3320 - Have a manuscript lying around gathering dust? Let me help you self-publish it <socrtwo@s2services.com>.

…

On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Brandon Desjarlais < ***@***.***> wrote: I could probably use either of these: 1. Corrupt Word DOCX Checker 2. Corrupt Word Document Checker 3. Corrupt Word Document (DOCX) Checker You are correct, the existing name is very clumsy. I'll keep this open and workshop this a little while and see if I can come up with a better name. I'm leaning towards 2, but I like the idea of explicitly calling out it only works for the open xml format document. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#8 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA2Cpjx80sX4kHdyhuYy8XGxHC-icxZoks5sXivcgaJpZM4O1bAP> .

[desjarlais]

I'll use "Corrupt Word Document Checker" for now and we can revisit later if this should be amended to include the "DOCX" qualifier. Thanks for the suggestions!

[socrtwo]

Happy to help. Best Wishes, Paul D Pruitt socrtwo@s2services.com (301) 493-4982 9006 Friars Rd. Bethesda, MD 20817-3320 - Have a manuscript lying around gathering dust? Let me help you self-publish it <socrtwo@s2services.com>.

…

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 12:14 AM, Brandon Desjarlais < ***@***.***> wrote: I'll use "Corrupt Word Document Checker" for now and we can revisit later if this should be amended to include the "DOCX" qualifier. Thanks for the suggestions! — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#8 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA2CpsXaWRQMHvT1WfBNEywp-ZFrUCInks5sX8m_gaJpZM4O1bAP> .