Talk:Bluetooth mesh networking

Telecommunications Start‑class Low‑importance

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Search for an appropriate article title

If I understand it correctly, the topic of this article is supposed to be one particular method of mesh networking over Bluetooth hardware. That particular method of mesh networking is managed by the Bluetooth company, and uses Bluetooth Low Energy as its networking protocol.

If that's right, then the problem is how to distinguish

mesh networking over Bluetooth hardware (in general); versus
mesh networking over Bluetooth hardware using the Bluetooth Low Energy protocol that Bluetooth (the company) wishes to promote as The Solution for mesh networking over Bluetooth hardware (which is a bit too long for an article title).

Capitalisation would be one way of distinguishing the two with compact titles, but the official Bluetooth pages that I see seem to interchange freely between capitalised and non-capitalised versions, fuzzing out the distinction.

Maybe:

mesh networking over Bluetooth which would briefly refer to the officially preferred method and in general to other methods; vs
Bluetooth mesh networking for the official article - this article right now mostly seems to concern that.

Any objections or better ideas? Boud (talk) 01:32, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think Bluetooth mesh would be even better to name a Bluetooth SIG - defined thing. Bluetooth mesh is already an alias to it. MichalHobot (talk) 07:20, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't follow what you're trying to say. "Bluetooth SIG" appears to be a company. This article is not about the company "Bluetooth SIG", so that's not under discussion. My guess is that you're trying to say that the best name for the article about Bluetooth's official networking solution is "Bluetooth mesh", and you have no comment on what the best name is for networks over Bluetooth in general. (Here, I have dropped the word "mesh", because from what I understand, that's only jargon and adds no meaning: a network has nodes joined in a logical graph, and a mesh network has nodes joined in a logical graph.)

If I have understood correctly, the "Bluetooth mesh" would still leave ambiguity about a "network over Bluetooth" versus a "network over Bluetooth using Bluetooth's official system". Boud (talk) 19:12, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: Bluetooth Special Interest Group appears to formally be a "not-for-profit, non-stock corporation" that sets technical standards and defends patents and trademarks. So not quite the same as a for-profit corporation on the stockmarket. I don't think that that changes the issue much, except that a standards organisation should be a bit more careful about setting a formal name rather than words that appear to be common English. Boud (talk) 20:03, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While you slowly gain knowledge on standard bodies, wireless protocols and network topologies (Mesh networking seems to be a good read for you) let me remove your Community Usage paragraph as being off topic. Once you decide where it belongs, feel free to put it there. MichalHobot (talk) 11:33, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]