• From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 16:14:43 +0100 (BST)

>So far, *nothing* has changed.

That's not true.  The patent policy document says:

  we have begun to use portions of the policy in the day-to-day
  operations of W3C

But even if that wasn't so, things have certainly changed.  Before,
people believed that W3C specs would not be encumbered by
royal-bearing patents; now, they have reason to believe that they may
be.

>Why should this be different all of a sudden?

See above.

>Can we keep the patent lawyers out the door for
>a moment and go back to technology, please?

You seem to mean "please go on working as if you knew that the W3C
will reject royalty-bearing-patent-encumbered specs, when in fact
there is good reason to believe that it won't".  In fact, the patent
issue affects whether many people will want to work on a project.
If that's "esoteric", I guess you have have to put up with esotericism.

-- Richard

• Prev by Date: RE: RAND issues
• Next by Date: RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, to day)
• Previous by thread: RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, today)
• Next by thread: RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, today)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread