[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)

• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2001 11:14:19 -0400

This has been a good discussion on patents.  However, the subject line
doesn't really suggest that.

I'm somewhat concerned that a W3C WG member asked for help, even help
that would challenge him, and most of the discussion that followed has
been on a tangent.  

While the XForms work has patent issues - and I'd like to hear more
about the issues specific to XForms before investing time in the
specification - most of the discussion hasn't had much to do with that.

Any chance of:
a) Sebastian or someone clarifying the IP story for XForms
b) patent discussion moving to a different subject line
c) Sebastian getting concrete answers on why XForms stinks?

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
"Every day, in every way, I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue

• References:
  • RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: Why RAND RF May Be A Good Idea
• Next by Date: [Zvon] An announcement for Python fans
• Previous by thread: RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)
• Next by thread: Re: Adobe XMP?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread