[Foundation] Reset: Back to business

Iain Shigeoka iainshigeoka at yahoo.com
Wed Mar 13 13:13:28 CST 2002

On 3/13/02 10:23 AM, "Harold E. Gottschalk Jr." <heg at imissary.com> wrote:

> I second Dave's suggestion to change the name to avoid the tradmark issues.
> heg
>> catastrophic - definitely not boring, though), and I believe some of the
>> archives will show my opinion about your second suggestion: XMPP was
>> suggested, and I believe it's the best option for us, because it says
>> exactly what "Jabber" is, and wouldn't be easy for anybody to trademark.
>> If we're looking at our IM system as the equivalent of email for the IM
>> world, we need a truly open name (unless we want to have to refer to our
>> protocol as RFC xxxx/yyyy/zzzz (since it's likely to get broken up into
>> several RFCs, anyway).  As for conformance issues, the easiest thing to
>> do is make sure the RFCs are 100% unambiguous and cover all the bases
>> so anything that conforms to the RFCs is XMPP- (or whatever we end up
>> calling our protocol suite) compliant.  As soon as our historical RFC
>> is accepted, we'll have something reasonably official to point to, and
>> if we can convince the IMPP group to give up on waiting for the big guys
>> to agree on something, we'll have something _very_ official to point to.
>> We can certainly move forward on this issue even without arguing with
>> Jabber, Inc. (although that would certainly be somewhat of a backstab,
>> in view of everything Jabber, Inc. has done for us), but I think your
>> approach may be wiser.

I agree as well.  My major problem with XMPP is that it's not a good
marketing term.  It should be something easily said and hopefully have
meaning, preferably in the english language.  As it stands, I don't see XMPP
as being better than RFC234334 (or ieee-1394)

I also would like to work with Jabber Inc. on this matter as we have a lot
tied up in the Jabber name and if we did switch out the name, it would hurt
Jabber Inc (who has been extremely good to us).  However, we also can't
hamstring the effort because one company wants to own the name...

There are a wide variety of ways to enforce compliance.  I prefer test
suites because they give you a clear yes/no answer rather than specs which
are subject to interpretation.  I think that is a secondary matter though.


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

More information about the Members mailing list