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

RE: License Feedback -- health and safety issues

• To: "Bullard, Claude L \(Len\)" <len.bullard@i...>, "Ken North" <kennorth@s...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: License Feedback -- health and safety issues
• From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@b...>
• Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 09:39:30 -0400
• Thread-index: AcWj+dggQmXdXiJ+T2+Brf5gn1+rigAAEMyQ
• Thread-topic: License Feedback -- health and safety issues

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:len.bullard@i...] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 9:32 AM
> To: 'Ken North'; xml-dev@l...
> Subject: RE:  License Feedback -- health and safety issues
> 
> The same for services.   It is the question I ask repeatedly: 
> what is the culpability for services created on top of 
> services, for example, using Google addresses and a separate 
> geocoding service?
> 
> I'd think long and hard before building an application over 
> unvetted and non-indemnified web services.  That this is also 
> true of standards and specifications built by polite 
> aggregation and published prior to serious implementation 
> goes without saying. 

Exactly. How about service insurance? I posed this idea to this listserv
and the W3C Semantic Web Services Public Listserv in Oct last year:

http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200410/msg00010.html

Is this a radical idea?
 
Joe

Joseph Chiusano
Booz Allen Hamilton
O: 703-902-6923
C: 202-251-0731
Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com

> That is why committee work without the participation of the 
> major vendors in any market space can be hazardous.  The days 
> of 'let's form an OASIS committee, get two buy-ins and start 
> writing a schema' produced monsters which no one in industry 
> wants to adopt and yet work their way into requirements 
> without any serious chance they will be adopted by more than 
> a few prototyping organizations or small wanna-be companies.
> 
> There is nothing new about this.  Some of us are veterans 
> from earlier efforts.  The difference is that there was no 
> common architectural platform such as the web in which to 
> spread the damage at light speed.
> 
> len
> 
> 
> From: Ken North [mailto:kennorth@s...]
> 
> Michael Kay wrote:
> > I've always thought that it's likely that in most incidents 
> of people
> being
> > killed as a result of software bugs (or IT systems bugs), 
> the software 
> > wasn't thought to be safety-critical at all.
> >
> > And as I said before, if your programming is negligent and it kills
> someone,
> > disclaimers are very unlikely to protect you.
> 
> This thread is about software licenses but it seems there's a 
> similar issue with XML vocabularies, DTDs and schemas.
> 
> What if a flawed schema design results in an accident? For 
> example, coding incorrect constraints for allowable 
> temperatures or pressures might cause an instrument or a 
> monitoring program to work from unsafe data.
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
> 
> 

• Prev by Date: RE: License Feedback -- health and safety issues
• Next by Date: RE: Is Web 2.0 the new XML?
• Previous by thread: RE: License Feedback -- health and safety issues
• Next by thread: RE: License Feedback -- health and safety issues
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread