[standards-jig] Another JNG Thread - Trademark
sverma at sfsu.edu
Sun Aug 18 20:38:56 UTC 2002
Adam Theo wrote:
> Hi all.
> With all this talk on Jabber NextGen recently, I've been wondering
> exactly how we should plan on referring to it in the future. Will it
> actually be called "Jabber Next Generation", with namespace prefixes
> of "jng", perhaps? Or will it be "Jabber 2.0" as I've been using? Or
> something different, not named after Jabber?
> I used to think that it should be "Jabber 2.0", since Jabber NextGen
> is too code-name-ish. I used to hate the name "Jabber", but have becom
> rather fond of the silly name. But as some have pointed out, the
> resulting generic transport protocol would *not* be Jabber, and would
> likely only confuse people who are not involved with the development.
> So, I'm thinking that a completely new name should be in order. We
> should begin discussing it now, I think.
A lot depends on what image "Jabber" conjures up currently. If all
people can relate to is IM, then JNG should really have a non-jabber
name. One of the images that come to my mind when I think about Jabber
(or IM in general) is a lot of frogs in monsoon :-)
Sameer Verma, Ph.D.
Asst. Professor of Information Systems
San Francisco State University
San Francisco CA 94132 USA
More information about the Standards