[Foundation] JSF == Jabber Standards Foundation?

Harold E. Gottschalk Jr. heg at imissary.com
Thu May 22 14:45:51 CDT 2003


Matt,

> 
> 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
Apache.

> 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

heg





More information about the Members mailing list