CXF implements a number of specifications which have been standardized for users be able to write interoperable and indeed portable web service implementations in Java.
Interoperable web service implementations are those which can successfully communicate with web services written in other languages or with the help of alternative Java frameworks.
In the SOAP world it is specifications like WS-Security for example which attempt to describe for what is needed for an interoperable secure multi-hop SOAP conversation to go ahead.
In the REST world it can be the combination of specifications like HTTP, AtomPub, XMLSecurity.
Portable web service implementations are those which can be successfully run on alternative Java web services stacks without their code having to be changed.
JAX-WS and JAX-RS are really those kind of specifications which enable Java implementations to participate in web services interactions as opposed to specifications like WS-Security for example. These specifications make it possible to write portable Java web service implementations.
It is interesting in this regard to comment on the fact that apparently Spring does not implement JAX-RS for example. I think Spring fans simply dont mind - they do care about being able to plug in into the web services world with the help of whatever tools Spring offers to them. Such web service implementations wont be portable but so what given than Spring users are probably not even thinking of leaving Spring ? What matters most is the interoperability.
In addition to those web services standards, there is another kind of healthy standards conflict in CXF : how to enable a certain feature, should it be enabled using the core Spring support or using a CXF specific Spring extension for example.
Many users who understand and like Spring consider using the core Spring support being the only standard way. Some other users are just happy with CXF extensions. For example in CXF JAX-RS, one can use either Spring AOP or CXF specific custom invokers to intercept a method invocation.
The goal of this blog entry is to say is that it is what your favorite framework does can become a standard for you. It is about liking what it does. If you are a Spring fan and do RESTful web services with Spring REST (or whatever it is being called) then it is the standard that works for you. If you are a JAX-RS RI fan then probably you dont mind if some of its features have not been standardized.
In CXF we will think and work on popularizing its own CXF standards, with the main goal, that of helping users writing interoperable and effective web services, being the priority.