Ironically EczemaScript is still a better name than ECMAScript.

It looks too much like "Acme" so it gets confused as a joke about cartoons. It looks too much like "acne", that is a too common skin problem, and it looks too much like "eczema" that is a rarer nasty-looking skin problem.

Whoever created that name should get a prize.

Anyway, the community not adopting that brand doesn't mean one can't rebrand JS.

> And I agree, because I have it too.

Eczema or ECMaScript?