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

RE: StAX XMLStreamWriter Oddities

• To: <bob@w...>,"'Xml-Dev'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: StAX XMLStreamWriter Oddities
• From: "Don Park" <donpark@d...>
• Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 12:28:02 -0800
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <001701c3a632$f9720280$650aa8c0@BOBDEV>
• Organization: Docuverse

Oops.  I left out the word 'application'.  I agree about SIR.  Whether or
not it was a 'defensive' application, I don't see anything novel and unique
about StAX and its implementations.  Also, I am dismayed that at least some
of the people who helped design StAX haven't been informed of the existence
of this patent application.

Aside from the patent, I can't help but notice some sloppiness in the API
like inconsistent method names which is, thankfully, just annoying rather
than encouraging mistakes like scrambled of parameter order does.

  In XMLStreamReader:

    getNamespaceURI() // returns URI
    getAttributeNamespace() // returns URI

  In XMLStreamWriter:

    setDefaultNamespace() // accepts URI
    writeDefaultNamespace() // accepts URI
    writeNamespace() // accepts prefix and URI

Now I wish I had reviewed StAX in more detail before it was finalized.

Best,

Don Park
http://www.docuverse.com/
http://www.docuverse.com/blog/donpark/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Wyman [mailto:bob@w...]
> Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2003 12:01 PM
> To: 'Don Park'; 'Xml-Dev'
> Subject: RE:  StAX XMLStreamWriter Oddities
> 
> Don Park wrote:
> >Also, I noticed that there is a patent filed on StAX by the StAX spec
> lead:
> 
> 	It's not a patent, just a patent application. These days, it
> is becoming fairly common practice to file applications on just about
> everything you do even if only to give your lawyers a chance to file
> continuations or modifications, etc. in the future. Nonetheless, it is
> useful to see who files these applications. It certainly tells you a
> lot about their willingness to be open with their technology...
> 	If this was a "defensive" application, intended to block
> others from filing patents and thus keeping the technology open, then
> it would be more appropriate to file for a "Statutory Invention
> Record," or SIR, which is like a patent but explicitly waives rights
> over the invention.
> 
> 		bob wyman

• References:
  • RE: StAX XMLStreamWriter Oddities
    • From: "Bob Wyman" <bob@w...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SAX for Binary Encodings (SAD-SAX)
• Next by Date: Re: SAX for Binary Encodings (SAD-SAX)
• Previous by thread: RE: StAX XMLStreamWriter Oddities
• Next by thread: Re: StAX XMLStreamWriter Oddities
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread