Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Agreed, and that's pretty much our position as expressed to the w3c. We need to keep the entry requirements to web services as low as possible, and RF is a key plank in that platform. Cheers, Dave BEA W3C AC rep At 12:02 PM 10/4/01 -0700, Tim Bray wrote: >I think that those standards which have to live in the >space where you might have to pay a toll to use them are >precisely those which W3C should stay away from. Yes they >exist - e.g. the IEEE standardizes lots of things which you >have to pay patents to use - but the reason the Web is >interesting is that anyone can play without having to pay >for permission. I'm not interested in playing RAND games. >I'm not interested in a Web where Open-Source efforts are >second-class citizens. > >I think that the W3C should adopt a policy of involving itself >only with RF patents, recognize that this is difficult and >complicated, and just deal with it. Tools that are available >to achieve this goal include: > >- requiring diligent search and disclosure from all members, > not just those who participate in particular WGs, for IP > that may stand in the way of some task or another >- where such IP exists and the holder isn't willing to grant > RF, changing the standard to work around the IP >- use of the bully pulpit and any other leverage the W3C can > bring to bear to make it very painful for anyone who tries to > set up a tollbooth on W3C output >- declining to enter standardization activities where it > appears that RF status can't be achieved > >I think this is very important. -Tim > > >----------------------------------------------------------------- >The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an >initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> > >The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
