To be fair, any name that doesn't imply somehow that it is indeed a better Markdown wouldn't do: Atwood and co are trying to make this new version the default.
"Hello, your project FooBar is cool, but it is badly specified, and your reference implementation is buggy. Because of that, we see many flavours of FooBar, each incompatible in some subtle way.
"We would like to make another flavour, with a tighter specification, and a less buggy reference implementation. Ideally, this would become the default flavour.
"What name would be acceptable for this?"
I have a strong feeling that Gruber just want his version of Markdown to stay the default, because he's the original author, dammit! He's probably not okay with the project itself, and would stop it if he could. I think the real reason why he finds "standard" so infuriating, is because he knows that with such a name, this flavour may actually catch on. Which may be a bad thing for http://daringfireball.net/ I don't know.
"Hello, your project FooBar is cool, but it is badly specified, and your reference implementation is buggy. Because of that, we see many flavours of FooBar, each incompatible in some subtle way.
"We would like to make another flavour, with a tighter specification, and a less buggy reference implementation. Ideally, this would become the default flavour.
"What name would be acceptable for this?"
I have a strong feeling that Gruber just want his version of Markdown to stay the default, because he's the original author, dammit! He's probably not okay with the project itself, and would stop it if he could. I think the real reason why he finds "standard" so infuriating, is because he knows that with such a name, this flavour may actually catch on. Which may be a bad thing for http://daringfireball.net/ I don't know.