I agree that many times conversation here gets sidelined by the distraction of complaints about a project's name. Usually because a piece of software has a name

I agree that many times conversation here gets sidelined by the distraction of complaints about a project's name. Usually because a piece of software has a name used by another older piece of software or a program or something of that nature. However in this case I think it's at least somewhat useful as both are basically programming languages and the Qt Project's QML is already in widespread use. Choosing such a name is bound to create confusion if only for the large overlap of the domains. Edit: Although I see that the papers referenced are from 2005 which predates the Qt Project's QML. It is still an unfortunately named language.