[Foundation] JSF == Jabber Standards Foundation?
Harold E. Gottschalk Jr.
heg at imissary.com
Thu May 22 14:45:51 CDT 2003
> I'd argue that the best role for the JSF in this respect is to lead
> compliance test development so that many implementations can
> be created
> and guaranteed to be interoperable. We'll never have success
> by trying
> to create a standard IM server (ala Apache) when there isn't
> a standard
> IM protocol. Creating an environment for open IM protocol development
> seems much more important then.
I believe that we are close to having an Open protocol that can be used
to establish an Open IM protocol and then create tools similar to
> I think this is a good argument for removing the word
> "Jabber" from the
> name of our organization. However, I don't see anything
> nefarious about
> JINC's contributions to the JSF. In fact, the opposite -- their
> contributions have truly helped to form an open IM protocol and they
> should continue to be greatly admired by the community for doing so.
> However, the next step of the JSF evolution means that we need to
> separate ourselves from JINC more as time goes on (a name
> change being a
> good way to do that). I believe this will end up being a good
> thing for
> everyone, including JINC.
I meant no disrespect for JINCs contribution nor implied they are or
ever did anything nefarious. They are focused on their own objectives
is what I had implied.
But a name change away from Jabber is extremely unlikely with the
current administration of the JSF. IMO
More information about the Members