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

Re: (Second) Last Call for XPointer 1.0

• From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
• To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 19:08:21 +0100

This issue might be important but it's certainly not new since it was
already mentioned in June 2000 [1] and highlighted in last December when
the proposal from Sun has been made public:

<quote>
The terms and conditions proposed by Sun would probably make the future
recommendation the first shrink-wrap W3C document whose simple download
would have important legal implications.
</quote>

Eve Maller can certainly not be accused to have hidden it...

My 0.02 Euros,

Eric

[1] http://xmlhack.com/read.php?item=573
[2] http://xmlhack.com/read.php?item=946

Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> 
> There's a much more significant issue raised in this draft for the
> first time than the question of how to map namespace prefixes. It's
> also come to light in this draft that Sun claims a patent on some of
> the technologies needed to implement XPointer.
> 
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist       Dyomedea                    http://dyomedea.com
http://xmlfr.org         http://4xt.org              http://ducotede.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------

• References:
  • (Second) Last Call for XPointer 1.0
    • From: Daniel Veillard <Daniel.Veillard@i...>
  • Re: (Second) Last Call for XPointer 1.0
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XML Schemas: Best Practices (touches XHTML modularization als o)
• Next by Date: Re: (Second) Last Call for XPointer 1.0
• Previous by thread: Re: (Second) Last Call for XPointer 1.0
• Next by thread: Re: (Second) Last Call for XPointer 1.0
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread