Related link: http://www.openp2p.com/pub/a/p2p/2001/04/25/jxta.html
JXTA probably should be jXTA, given the following reasons based on today’s announcement. I believe this for two reasons:
First, JXTA probably should be jXTA, given the emphasis on its XML foundation. Looking at the architecture in Rael Dornfest’s (O’Reilly Network Maven and JXTA Technical Advisor) article on JXTA Takes Its Position, it’s clear that the JXTA technology layer consists of XML as a facilitator between the peer-to-peer networking and the Web services spaces. I believe this may be Sun’s entry to counter the IBM-Microsoft-Ariba backed Web Service Description Language (WSDL) specification under review with the W3C. According to Rael Dornfest, “…This opens up doors for rather powerful application building and cross-over between peer-to-peer and the Web Services space with which they are usually associated.” This is something the current WSDL may be lacking.
Second, I’ve heard from many sources that the JXTA programming platform is fully expected to be implemented in other languages besides Java: C, Perl, Python, perhaps even Microsoft’s Java-like C#.
Need I say more. JXTA should be jXTA. It certainly shouldn’t be Jxta, as pointed out in this CNET News.com article, Jxta, usable, but for what?.