[Foundation] JSF == Jabber Standards Foundation?

Iain Shigeoka iain at jivesoftware.com
Thu May 22 23:12:44 CDT 2003

On Thursday, May 22, 2003, at 19:55 US/Pacific, Matt Tucker wrote:

> Richard,
>> Most people know the technology as "Jabber" not XMPP the relatively 
>> new term to arrive,
> I simply don't believe this is true, and perhaps it's because I am 
> newer to the community than many others. Ever since IM has gotten 
> "hot", the press has used the term XMPP. I also pointed out some links 
> in a previous email detailing the strange perceptions people have 
> about Jabber as the company vs the open protocol. Finally, I think 
> it's simply a fact that all companies outside of JInc will be using 
> the term XMPP and not Jabber once there is an IETF standard. We need 
> to adjust to this reality. "Jabber Basic IM 1.0" compliance has much 
> less chance of being advertised on companies' websites vs a term that 
> doesn't refer to a competitor.

I completely agree. I've been worrying a bit about the compliance logo 
that would accompany the certification of a Jabber Basic product. Not 
only do we have Jabber in the name, but we also use a lightbulb as a 
logo. A lightbulb and "Jabber Basic 1.0 compliant". I'm cringing at the 
level of confusion with customers and questioning the value of getting 
certified. I'm worried and hope we can come up with a solution that 
would work.

>> I think its fine to change the name to "Jabber Standards Foundation" 
>> since that will minimize the collateral confusion your suggestion 
>> creates (the acronym even stays the same), changing Software to 
>> Standards is perfectly adequate to more than clearly show our true 
>> focus.
>> Do we really want to throw all the work we have done already 
>> promoting "Jabber" (in terms of the name of the higher level 
>> protocol) ???
> I agree that Jabber Standards Foundation is better than Jabber 
> Software Foundation. However, I think that the community would never 
> accpet two name changes, which is why I'm proposing the more radical 
> shift to get rid of "Jabber" now.
> It's a bit scary sounding to adopt a totally new name, but now is the 
> perfect oppurtunity. As XMPP becomes an IETF standard, the crucial 
> debates will be had over which IM standards everyone should use. With 
> the word "Jabber" in our name, I think the JSF's position in that 
> debate will be very weakened. Let's take the bigger risk of a more 
> radical name change, as I think the reward would be a truly fair, open 
> community that can attract a large internet audience.

I agree. I feel like this is logo all over again and my head hurts. I 
regret opportunities lost during that effort to differentiate Jabber 
and the JSF and would like to avoid that happening again. the XMPP 
effort is a great opportunity to take advantage of the open standards 
'midas touch' of the IETF.


More information about the Members mailing list