[jdev] Jabber-ID email header

ennova2005-jabber at yahoo.com ennova2005-jabber at yahoo.com
Wed Mar 1 13:17:09 CST 2006

Another +1 to XMPP-ID. 

1. The protocol standard is XMPP (and not Jabber) - all our efforts should be behind the "XMPP" bandwagon.
2. There is atleast one commercial vendor with Jabber in their name. There are also popular opensource servers with jabber in their name. In that sense, jabber-id creates more confusion about product affinity rather than clarity and neutrality.
3. On the URI vs ID issues - people who know enough to add headers also know enough to tell the difference.

Use of jabber-id is as much "sentimental" than historical but if the group is going to follow a convention, I'd say use XMPP

My 2 xents.


Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at jabber.org> wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jesus Cea wrote:
> Robert B Quattlebaum, Jr. wrote:
>>> Any particular reason why we are using "Jabber-ID" instead of "XMPP-ID"?
> +1

Are you saying +1 to his question or +1 to XMPP-ID? :-)

I see several reasons for Jabber-ID:

1. Jabber-ID is historical. In other words, people recognize "Jabber-ID"
but they don't recognize "XMPP-ID", see for instance documents such as

2. XMPP-ID might get confused with XMPP URI. We don't want people to
include full XMPP URIs here (or at least I don't think we do, since the
processing rules are a lot more complicated for full URIs).


- --
Peter Saint-Andre
Jabber Software Foundation

Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/jdev/attachments/20060301/d778e9c0/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the JDev mailing list