• From: Dmitry Turin <sql4-en@n...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:09:42 +0300

Julian,

>> RS> there is some fundamental flaw that makes a "fast" implementation impossible
>> What flaw ?
JR> I think the point was that you won't know about a flaw like that until
JR> you have tried to implement it, thus it would be unwise to standardize
JR> it earlier.
(1) Theorem of existance of _fundamental_ flaw is not proved.
(2) You postulate, that _fundamental_ flaw must be, even not naming (entitling) them.

JR> it would be unwise to standardize it earlier.
Agruments are necessary, as usual ! Without them, it's only words.

But argument against are the following:
large manufactorers (e.g. Oracle, etc) refuse implement before standardization.

>> RS> Perhaps one of the key concepts is covered by a patent held by a jerk.
JR> Then the specification would be of less use, because fewer people would
JR> be interested in or capable of implementing it.
(1) Ideas (instead of algorithms) are not capable to be patented !
(2) International patent does not exist
(if you want to patent, you must make this in each country separetely).

From where you have this fear ("perhaps") ?


Dmitry Turin
SQL5      (5.5.0)  http://sql50.euro.ru
HTML6     (6.4.3)  http://html60.euro.ru
Unicode7  (7.2.0)  http://unicode70.euro.ru
Computer2 (2.0.2)  http://computer20.euro.ru

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: SQL5
    • From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@g...>

• References:
  • Re[4]: SQL5
    • From: Dmitry Turin <sql4-en@n...>
  • Re: Re[4]: SQL5
    • From: Richard Salz <rsalz@u...>
  • Re[6]: SQL5
    • From: Dmitry Turin <sql4-en@n...>
  • Re: SQL5
    • From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@g...>