[Standards] A Meta-Discussion about the Standards Process

Marvin W xmpp at larma.de
Sat Jan 18 12:43:53 UTC 2020


On 1/17/20 10:53 PM, Dave Cridland wrote:
> In my experience, a lot of the draw for XMPP is the fact
> it's an off-the-shelf solution with interoperable pieces. That's (at
> least) a by-product of standardization.

I see your point but I fail to see how it counters my point. If they
only care about the interoperable pieces, a WHATWG defining them for the
most popular software is completely fine for them. They don't need a
proper standard, they just need the off-the-shelf solution. You are
exactly confirming that point with Pando by using off-the-shelf
non-standard solutions by ESL. The important part for such uses is that
this solution is cheaper than others, the standardization (= our unpaid
work) is just what caused most of it.

> And, you know, being able to say "Military Grade Security" to the
> enterprise market and actually *mean* it wouldn't be all bad.
> 
> Losing Fortnite wouldn't, I admit, make a huge difference to most of the
> community, though by the sounds of things, Guus would lose the respect
> of his kid - and I can tell you that it gets a lot of interest when
> you're trying to explain why XMPP is interesting to the crowd at FOSDEM.

I see how it can help with marketing that known popular proprietary
services use XMPP. On the other end, XSF (and the XMPP community) is so
bad at marketing that I doubt it made a huge difference.

> I'm not sure that's true either - E2EE is really important to many
> places, even walled gardens, and because the attraction of XMPP is a
> proven technology that people can pick up and use, the fact that they
> cannot with OMEMO is a serious problem. (Worse, OMEMO has been in use by
> people presumably unaware that their software is inadvertently GPL).

You are touching an interesting point here and while I don't want to
open the OMEMO can again, I think it's worth mentioning how those two
things you just said combine: If closed ecosystem companies primarily
take off-the-shelf things they don't really care if the standard relies
on a library that is under GPL, they care if there are off-the-shelf
non-GPL implementations. So even if it turned out that OMEMO has no GPL
issues, this wouldn't resolve their issue.

Marvin


More information about the Standards mailing list