[Foundation] JSF == Jabber Standards Foundation?
stpeter at jabber.org
Fri May 23 12:45:57 CDT 2003
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 01:35:30AM -0400, Matt Tucker wrote:
> Let's be clear -- Jabber is the name of a company and the JSF is the
> name of the community. The "phenomenon" is a core protocol that is now
> known as XMPP and extensions through JEP's. It's time for the community
> to continue to evolve past the company name and into a truly open body.
The JSF is not the name of the community. We don't know how big the
community is -- most of the community is *not* involved in the JSF, just
as most of the Web community is not involved in the W3C (though take me
out and shoot me if the JSF ever becomes a plutocracy like the W3C!).
Ideally, XMPP would have been submitted in the Transport area in the
IETF, which would have made XMPP simply XML streams and the core data
elements for messaging, presence, and request-response interactions.
Unfortunately, that was not our opportunity in the IETF, and we needed
to enter through the Applications door (including the full protocol
elements needed to address the IM and presence requirements defined in
RFC 2779). I still consider XMPP to be the core transport layer, and
everything else (including what is defined in XMPP IM) as Jabber. But I
suppose I'm just an old-fashioned obstructionist with outdated ideas.
> >Any person who has ever tried to build a community will
> >tell you that changing from an established, known name to something else
> >_will_ hurt community recognition (and likely growth/adoption).
> Yes, it's not a trivial change. However, a shift to XMPP as the dominant
> terminology isn't exactly radical. It's been happening gradually ever
> since the IETF efforts started. These days, everyone agrees that the
> core protocol is called "XMPP" and not "Jabber", whereas it was a pretty
> different story one year ago. Now it's important that we continue that
> shift. I really doubt that any momentum in the community would be lost.
We do not have this option. XMPP is off the table as the entire
community and all the protocol extensions. The W3C is not called the
HTTP Consortium for good reason -- the IETF would never allow that to
happen (or such is my understanding).
> However, the community and protocol needs to evolve past Jabber the
> company. A very good way to do that is by changing the name of the JSF.
The community and protocol evolved past JINC a long time ago.
Jabber Software Foundation
More information about the Members