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

RE: KAVI

• To: 'Chiusano Joseph' <chiusano_joseph@b...>
• Subject: RE: KAVI
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 13:39:18 -0600
• Cc: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>

Understood.

One further comment regarding open systems and IP. 

If OASIS intends to close up the lists, it should 
commensurately change all IP policies to match 
perfectly those of the W3C, that is, no RAND; only 
RF.  Open lists have the advantages that decisions 
made with regards to the technology to be spec'd 
or standardized have been reviewed prior to incorporation 
by the most eyes with the longest possible memory. 

Failure of certain groups to widely disseminate 
their work in SGML hypertext systems made it possible 
for the bogus patents such as the Sun patent on 
XML Pointer technology and the Microsoft patent 
on stylesheets to make it through the process. 
Due diligence is insufficient on the part of the 
patenting parties because of the inability or 
unwillingness to look deep enough.  A well-informed 
public is always to be preferred.

Ultimately these decisions will result in a narrowing 
of scope for the organizations that work in more 
closed groups.  Niche specifications that may prove 
to be innovations will move onto other public lists 
such as Yahoo, or behind closed doors with additional 
incentive to patent whereever possible any innovation 
with some promise of ROI.  Because patent revenues 
are lucrative, one must weigh the costs of closure 
against incentivizing this already out of control 
process.

len

From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@b...]

Thanks - without seeing the note you refer to I would not be equipped to
comment further.

"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" wrote:
> 
> A note from a chair of a list I participate on.
> One side effect is to limit the participation of
> non-OASIS members regardless of their depth of
> participation or contribution.  That can be a
> serious handicap to the niche efforts.  It
> would be sad to see the innovations that are
> born of research and experimentation have to
> move to Yahoo.
> 
> I understand the difficulties of constraining
> open lists.  I also understand the advantages.
> Far too often what has initially looked like
> yet another lunatic-fringe element has proven
> to be a seminal and important source of ideas
> even where they are in conflict with the immediate
> goals of the corporate membership.

• Prev by Date: Transformation versus Translation
• Next by Date: RE: KAVI
• Previous by thread: Re: KAVI
• Next by thread: RE: KAVI
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread