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

RE: OASIS/W3C (was XPointer REC)

• To: 'todd glassey' <todd.glassey@w...>
• Subject: RE: OASIS/W3C (was XPointer REC)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:45:22 -0600
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

It's not a copyright issue.  It is an issue of 
citation by reference and the integrity of the 
citation.   Citing documents in various stages 
of completion is done all the time.  A citation 
might include status information and the cited 
document should include such information in an 
easily found location.  Terms of use might also 
accompany this.  Anyone who follows such a 
citation should use the document found in accordance 
with the terms of use found with it.  Failing to 
provide such terms is an error of authorship and 
ownership; failing to find and follow such terms 
is an error of use.  

I'm not following this thread closely, but if 
the document is published on the web, there isn't 
much OASIS can do to stop it from being cited except 
as noted above to provide clear and easily found 
terms of use.  This is similar to the deep linking 
issue in that there is really no such thing as a 
deep link; if it has a URI and is on the web, 
it is referenceable.  

Think of it in terms of having a URI/URL without 
business rules for the identified resource.  It 
isn't illegal; results are unspecified.  Caveat emptor.

len


From: todd glassey [mailto:todd.glassey@w...]

No Simon - I am saying that the integrity of the standards process is
paramount to creating ongoing standards that are accepted - look at many of
the IETF's working groups - they produce draft and rfc after rfc only to
have them go nowhere - and this is a failing of the WG process and the
concept of public vetting.

I personally see OASIS as a potentially huge contributor in the longer run
way beyond what it has done to date and so I was concerned that it as an
organization would allow anyone to refer to things that were in a state of
flux or not publicly published as standards yet.

Its amazing to me how many people have interpreted this as "I have some
hidden agenda". There is no hidden agenda here - just a desire to see a
process wherein the org takes ownership of its IP and protects it while its
in the formative stages. And that is what I feel that this W3C action of
citing an unreleased document is not appropriate.

I also believe that it is a copyright issue as well, but not being a lawyer
I may be wrong there. Although I have spent the last three years in a
lawsuit recovering my personal IP's from some unscrupulous individuals that
licensed them and never paid for them so I am somewhat savvy to these
things.

• Prev by Date: RE: [ANN] XML Standards Library 2.0 : Updated 2003-03-26
• Next by Date: Re: OASIS/W3C (was XPointer REC)
• Previous by thread: RE: OASIS/W3C (was XPointer REC)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread