That's the kind of "compelling in theory, irrelevant in practice" comment I would make if I had no/obsolete experience with XMPP. It just works, with a healthy and thriving ecosystem of compatible client/server implementations developed independently by many organisations (small and large) around the world. At the user-level, it's just plug and play. As a developer, you don't even have to see any XML (you can deserialize your stanzas into whatever higher-level/prettier construct the programming language/stack your product depends on)

The argument that xmpp problems stem from XML format is the silliest of all: from 15 years of working with xmpp, we had all kinds of problems, but none of them were caused by XML format.

XML isn't the root of any problems, it's just one extra annoyance

No, it isn't. Source: I work with it every day.

I picked XML for Jabber in 1998, and at that time I think it was the best choice :)

Hi Jeremie, you made the world a better place, thanks for Jabber!

On the contrary, xmpp is a very good protocol. The problem with it is that most of extensions are bad: half-baked, often contradict or duplicate other extensions, and sometimes solve only part of the problem that they intend to solve.

Disclosure: my team and I are actively working on improving xmpp, but in a rather orthogonal direction to general XSF council route.

> The problem with it is that most of extensions are bad: half-baked, often contradict or duplicate other extensions, and sometimes solve only part of the problem that they intend to solve.

I think that's in the organic nature of protocols catching-up to changing goals and priorities, as the state of the art and the user needs evolve. I think it's pretty-well acknowledged by the XSF (and to a further extent by modernxmpp.org) by curating a short-list of XEPs and behaviours to implement.