[standards-jig] JEPs and Jabber Adoption

Thomas Muldowney temas at box5.net
Sat Jun 28 22:00:07 UTC 2003

I had a long reply to this previously but the webmail client I was using
at the time ate it.  My arguments came down to a few points though. 
First and foremost we have to keep interoperability in mind.  Many of
your examples just dont' make sense because they do not effect
interoperability they are all about choices to base systems.  Take the
filesystem example, just because I use ext3 doesn't mean I can't send a
file to someone using XFS.  If we wanted to compare we'd need to look at
API or ABI disscusions.  Those can be bitter and long.  Another of your
examples is the desktop split for *nix systems.  Well, they have
something like the JSF, it's called freedesktop.org, and they have long
drawn out discussions to find a single interoperable standard for many
desktop services.  Interoperability takes time and effort, but the
rewards are well worth it.

Reading your suggestions about moving stuff to draft can only make me
think that our rules should be s/experimental/draft.  What you advocate
seems to change nothing.  We'd just end up putting the red warning on
draft jeps instead of experimental jeps.

I still feel my comments stand about the s-jig itself and the council
needing to participate more.  I looked at the numbers for this month and
out of 257 members just roughly 15% have posted on the list.  Sure they
may get tired of having to argue the fine points, I know I want to walk
away almost every week, but we have to argue the fine points so that we
have a solid _interoperable_ system.  I'm not saying I want things to
move slowly, I think it's possible to do this rapidly, but it takes
effort from everybody, council, s-jig, and anyone else that cares.


More information about the Standards mailing list