[Foundation] Clarifications On Name Change Proposal
matt at jivesoftware.com
Tue Jul 1 13:22:58 CDT 2003
> I mean, I'd be fine calling the standards body JEP (or something), and
> saying that the JEP helps guide the protocol, etc etc. But I thought the
> name change was because of a confusion in the marketplace over the concept
> of "jabber", and who owns that.
> So...would it be sufficient to simply divide the JSF into two
> organizational structures, one which promotes the "jabber" community (the
> jabber.net/org things listed above), and one which would not have "jabber"
> in its name and serve as the open protocol standards organization?
I think the JSF has traditionally played two roles (the ones you outline
1) Development and extension of the core protocol.
2) Promotion and support of the community in general.
Over time, I think the first role has grown in importance while the
second role has waned. I think many people would agree that now the JSF
should be entirely focused on protocol creation/extension and advocacy.
What the marketplace needs is open, non-encumbered terminology for the
protocol. That's handled by a new name for the JSF.
There are already some great community sites such as JabberCentral that
may perhaps continue to grow in importance. There was also a lot of talk
recently about resurrecting jabbercentral. I think that having a
seperation between the protocol org and the general community
organizations is a good thing for everyone.
More information about the Members