[Members] s/JEP/XEP/g

[Matt Tucker]

Peter,

I think these are all solid ideas that will help to decrease confusion.
How can I (and others that are interested) help make it happen? :)

Thanks,
Matt 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: members-bounces at jabber.org 
> [mailto:members-bounces at jabber.org] On Behalf Of Peter Saint-Andre
> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:51 AM
> To: members at jabber.org
> Subject: [Members] s/JEP/XEP/g
> 
> I think it may be time to change our protocol branding to XMPP.
> 
> I realize this may seem radical. In 2004 we had a big debate 
> about this and it almost split the community apart. And at 
> that time I opposed any such change. But times change and 
> people change their minds too. Here is my reasoning:
> 
> 1. In 2004 we were paranoid about using "XMPP" because we 
> didn't want to scare the IETF. But I think we would be OK if 
> we clearly label the protocols that we define as "XMPP 
> Extensions" rather than as changes to XMPP itself (which is 
> still all and only what is defined in the RFCs).
> See the "Relation to XMPP" note in any Standards Track JEP 
> for details.
> 
> 2. Now "XMPP" is much better known. "Jabber" is still better 
> known, but in the protocol space "XMPP" is now quite common.
> 
> 3. Over time we have worked to disambiguate the term "Jabber" 
> (thus "jabberd" instead of "the Jabber server") and this is 
> part of that effort.
> 
> 4. "XMPP" (and "XMPP extension") provides a neutral, 
> non-trademarked term for the protocols we use. This is 
> especially popular among software vendors and service 
> providers (e.g., you'll note that folks like Jive Software 
> and Google Talk use the term "XMPP" rather than "Jabber").
> 
> 5. This would be limited to *protocol* branding (for now). So 
> we would still have the Jabber Software Foundation as our 
> umbrella organization (I think to change the organization 
> name legally would be a PITA). But we would move our protocol 
> documents from jabber.org to xmpp.org and change them from 
> Jabber Enhancement Proposals to XMPP Extension Protocols or 
> something like that. But we might brand xmpp.org as a 
> sub-group or initiative of the JSF. I used to think the name 
> "XMPP Technology Consortium" was cool but "XTC" might not be 
> such a good acronym. ;-) So now I lean to "XMPP Technology 
> Forum" (which sounds more open than a consortium).
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Peter
> 
> --
> Peter Saint-Andre
> Jabber Software Foundation
> http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.shtml
> 
>