stpeter at jabber.org
Wed Aug 23 17:10:47 CDT 2006
Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Ian Paterson wrote:
>>> The fact that services like GoogleTalk are shying away from using the
>>> term 'JID' (or some other suitable vendor-neutral phrase) will only
>>> lead to more consumer confusion in the future, and that will hurt
>>> Jabber/XMPP adoption IMHO.
>> Maybe if we asked Google nicely they might consider adopting or even
>> promoting the term 'JID'? I'd say it's not out of the question, since up
>> to now they've been pretty keen to make it clear they are supporting
>> open standards (to help differentiate themselves from MSN, AOL and Yahoo).
> I have to say this is not a hill for me to die on. I'm not particularly
> fond of the fragmentation, though.
If we really want to be imperialistic about it, we can use the term "IM
address" -- as in, we *are* the standard way to do IM. And there is an
im: URI scheme too (but its semantics are confusing, it's just a way of
invoking a standards-based IM system such as XMPP or SIMPLE, not sure if
you can use it to invoke AIM or things like that).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 7358 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20060823/a86ea70b/smime-0001.bin
More information about the Members