[Foundation] name change proposal
ben at blahr.com
Thu Jul 10 17:16:28 CDT 2003
Stephen Lee said:
> And as far as name confusion I did a quick search and turned up articles
> that confuse (in my opinion) the JSF, Jabber and Jabber Inc.
These examples are weak. You've taken three articles that clearly
reference Jabber, Inc. in the first paragraph, and that are clearly
written about Jabber, Inc.'s business expliots. Explain to me how these
confused the JSF, Jabber and Jabber, Inc.? Its called marketing. I imagine
that if other companies making Jabber-based software invested more time
into marketing their software, and their achievements, there would be
articles about them on Instant Messaging Planet, as well.
> I posted the first 3 I found, there are tons more.
I would love to see an article that actually defends the claims you, and
Matt are making. Here's a couple that clearly don't... and that explicitly
talk about Jabber as a community, movement, and not XMPP:
> Although everyone seems to make a distinction as XMPP as a protocol and
> Jabber as the IM you can see from this article that it is pushed as the
> same thing
> "We can help bring a pretty tried and true instant messaging solution
> to the standards effort, while at the same time [the IETF process] can
> help harden up some of the areas of XMPP."
Explain this. Everyone seems to agree that, because everyone seems to
believe that IM requires file transfers, pubsub, etc. I don't. I don't see
why somebody couldn't build a reasonable IM solution on top of XMPP as it
stands within the IETF. However, for building applications on top of XMPP,
you need pubsub and some of the other features that are developed by the
JSF. That's Jabber. XMPP is a protocol that enables CPIM compliant instant
messaging. Jabber is everything beyond that.
More information about the Members