[Foundation] RE: good discussion

[Iain Shigeoka]

At 03:43 PM 5/16/2001 -0500, you wrote:

>I vote to call the protocol IMTP (Instant Messaging Transport Protocol) ala
>HTTP, FTP, et. al.
>
>I think "Jabber Powered" or "Powered By Jabber" are actually misnomers,
>unless you actually have a Jabber Server embedded in your product.  If your
>product is a client, I would assume that advertising that it is "IMTP
>compliant" would be what you really want.  I mean after all, we don't want
>AIM to be "Powered by Jabber" but it sure would be nice if it were "IMTP
>Compatible"

This seems to be a popular idea.  However, I think its a very important 
distinction with large consequences.

>If it's an actual rename, then I suppose some clarification is in order (TBD
>by the foundation, I would assume) as to what exactly "Jabber" is and who
>can use it.  In all honesty, since the server has been renamed, it's quite
>possible that the word "Jabber" might come out of common use and the whole
>discussion of who owns the trademark becomes moot.

This is one that I think is the largest consequence.  "Jabber" becomes 
irrelevant if the protocol is named "IMTP" or what ever.  Who would really 
care about "Jabber" as a name then?  I mean who says they're Mosaic 
compatible browsers these days?  Unless the protocol name is catchy though, 
I think complaint clients and servers will come up with another name for 
the protocol or system (like web because HTTP is not too cool).  Say we 
start referring to the protocol as Imp.  Then I'd have an imp client who's 
name may or may not have anything to do with IMTP.  Probably if my company 
name were hoowa it would be called the "Hoowa Imp Communicator" or 
something like that.

Since both j.c and j.o have gone through a lot of effort and the media has 
already started to familiarize themselves with the name Jabber.  Jabber.com 
loses a big marketing advantage if they allow the Jabber name to not mean 
the jabber protocol.  However I don't think they can straddle the fence 
forever and try and keep the name Jabber as the protocol and open, but have 
Jabber the trademark be theirs and closed.  I think Jabber.com is in a 
really difficult position and I have a feeling they won't be able to 
maintain it for long.

IMHO, eventually they will either need to rename themselves so they can 
create clear brand identity separate from the Jabber protocols (like SGI is 
separate from OpenGL), or they'll have to allow the protocols to be named 
something else, making their current name have much less worth.  I have no 
ill will at all towards j.c and in fact really like the way they have tried 
to handle the situation and themselves.  I just think they have gotten into 
a bad situation that is going to be painful and difficult to get out of.

As for our Jabber community, if we do decide on naming the protocols 
something else, I suggest we use a marketable name as we will want to brand 
our products with that name.  As such, acronyms are probably out.  I would 
personally like an animal name as it would lend itself to a logo.

Perhaps something like the "whalesong" protocols.  Long range, simple, 
beautiful communication and a whale would make a cool mascot.  :)  Or take 
a cut at microsoft and call it whalestorm!  :)

-iain


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com