In terms of photography, I don't think I have ever seen either raw, Raw or RAW, used in a way that leaves ambiguity.
All the discussion really boils down to is (as pointed out to us in the very first post) the pedantry aspect, which is why I said was in the 'who cares' camp.
Still, for those who do care, then lots of people have it right even though they disagree i.e. it is not an acronym(RAW); it is not a proper noun(Raw), and indeed the post about the DPR house style actually describes a common noun before boldly declaring it a proper noun; and the common noun version(raw) is clearly accepted by many (I suspect most digital photographers with any experience of such files) as describing a type of file produced by many digital cameras.
But all in all, I enjoy reading these kinds of topics: nobody is getting irate, points of view are being expressed, differences are being accepted. Nice.
All the discussion really boils down to is (as pointed out to us in the very first post) the pedantry aspect, which is why I said was in the 'who cares' camp.
Still, for those who do care, then lots of people have it right even though they disagree i.e. it is not an acronym(RAW); it is not a proper noun(Raw), and indeed the post about the DPR house style actually describes a common noun before boldly declaring it a proper noun; and the common noun version(raw) is clearly accepted by many (I suspect most digital photographers with any experience of such files) as describing a type of file produced by many digital cameras.
But all in all, I enjoy reading these kinds of topics: nobody is getting irate, points of view are being expressed, differences are being accepted. Nice.