matt at jivesoftware.com
Mon Nov 13 22:46:31 CST 2006
I think that "Forum" is a bit weak sounding. Given a choice, I'd be more
inclined to accept standards from a "foundation" rather than a "forum".
There's little chance we won't be perceived as open given our history.
:) I'd also argue that "foundation" has a more non-profit/open source
feel, which is more in tune with the character of the community than the
more commercial-sounding "forum". That along with differentiation from
SIP Forum makes me +1 on Foundation.
> 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:
More information about the Members