stpeter at jabber.org
Mon Nov 13 22:19:46 CST 2006
Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> Ian Paterson wrote:
>> I'm +1 on XSF too.
>> IMHO, the words "XMPP" and "Standards" must be in there. The "F" could
>> be for "Foundation" or "Forum", either would work well.
>> "XMPP Standards Forum" rolls off the tongue a bit more easily, and it
>> describes our process well. Whereas "Foundation" sounds nice and solid
>> (a good attribute for a standards authority or forum), and it is
>> consistent with the JSF heritage.
> I agree that Foundation sounds solid if a bit stodgy, whereas Forum
> sounds friendly and open. I don't particularly want to introduce
> confusion (or competition) with the SIP Forum, which is a marketing
> group and not a standards organization, and that's the main reason I
> lean toward Foundation (despite the fact that in the abstract I prefer
I did find one "Forum" group that might be analogous to what we do, the
Open Grid Forum: http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_overview.php
"XMPP Standards Forum" is indeed easier to say than "XMPP Standards
Foundation" and that's not unimportant. Plus I like the fact that a
forum is open (as OGF is), not closed like a consortium (think W3C,
IEEE, and all the rest).
More examples of standards development organizations here:
Jabber Software Foundation
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 7358 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20061113/8d444de9/smime.bin
More information about the Members