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

RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, today)

• From: Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer <schnitz@m...>
• To: Don Park <donpark@d...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 16:44:21 +0200

That's exactly what I mean with esoteric:

So far, *nothing* has changed. Until now, the W3C
released good stuff and it simply worked. 
Why should this be different all of a sudden?

Can we keep the patent lawyers out the door for
a moment and go back to technology, please?

- Sebastian


-----Original Message-----
From:	Don Park
Sent:	Fri 10/5/2001 4:17 PM
To:	xml-dev@l...
Cc:	
Subject:	RE:  Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it
stinks, today)

> had enough of esoteric W3C rants - let's get real:

Esoteric?  What have you been smoking?

I am not touching XForms or anything with W3C written on it until I get
some
assurance from W3C that their stuff are either patent-free or uses
free-patents.

Don


-----------------------------------------------------------------
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 elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>

winmail.dat

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, today)
    • From: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@n...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, today)
• Next by Date: RE: RAND issues
• Previous by thread: Re: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, today)
• Next by thread: RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, today)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread