[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Microsoft files for XML patents, says C|Net
Rex Brooks wrote: > these patent applications (conducted in Europe and New > Zealand) apply only to MS Office's (Word's) handling of XML The only way you could read this application as being limited to MS Office is if you buy into the argument that Word is the only word-processor left. The claims don't speak of "Word" they speak of "word-processing" files. Thus, if Open Office, Apple, or anyone else wanted to have a word- processor with an XML file format defined in XSD, then they would violate the sought-for patent even if their XSD was completely different from the one used by Word. And, what will happen once these vaguely defined "word-processor" files start flowing through mail systems or get inserted into Atom entries... We're going to find it very easy to stumble over this patent in hundreds of different domains -- not just Word. > I don't necessarily see any great reason to get in a swivet > about it. There are many reasons why a "swivet" is totally appropriate here. First, the specific domain of word- processing based on files whose schema is defined in XSD would become Microsoft proprietary space if this patent issues. Given the move to XML that we're seeing (and hopefully encouraging) and given the move to using schemas (which should also be encouraged...), this is a very serious land-grab that could block many, many innovations in the future. Of course, it could also signify the death of XSD. If Microsoft patents the use of XSD in such a broad domain, it might just force us all to move to RelaxNG or ASN.1 for defining XML schemas instead. XSD would then become, for all intents and purposes, a Microsoft *proprietary* schema language and the rest of us would use other schema languages or work without one. (Note: I realize that there are many would would consider such a move to be a "good thing." However, we should do it because we think it is the technically correct thing to do, not just because we're avoiding a patent...) Of course, if, as threatened in an earlier message, *I* patent "word-processing" with XML and RelaxNG, then you'll all be forced to use ASN.1 since it is the only patent-free alternative with established prior- art! :-) (Note: The ASN.1 vendors watching this thread just decided to raise their prices since demand will soon increase...) >ensure that XML doesn't become a de facto MS property. The issue in the application isn't the use of XML. It is the use of XML *with* XSD. Thus, it is "XML with XSD" that is at risk of becoming Microsoft proprietary -- not XML itself. General note: Please understand that nothing in this message should, in any way, be read as "anti-Microsoft." I would have the same comments no matter who had filed this patent application and my comments should apply to the many hundreds of other patents and application that have claims that mention HTML, XHTML, XML, etc. If someone other than Microsoft had filed this patent, I would do anything I could to help Microsoft defeat this patent if they asked for help (but they wouldn't...). The issue here is that this is an application for a patent based on substitution of equivelants. i.e. XSD rather than ASN.1 or something else. It is critical that this type of patent not be granted since it poses a significant threat to the entire community of XML users. By permitting this type of substitution, the principle of "prior art" is basically discarded since a claim's dependency on a substitute will be used to exclude *any* prior art -- no matter how old, how obvious, or how well known. "Yes, it's been done before, however, it's never been done with XSD... Thus, it is patentable." This is wrong and must stop. bob wyman
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|