[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Of the XPointer Patent
- From: Uche Ogbuji <email@example.com>
- To: Daniel.Veillard@imag.fr
- Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 11:05:34 -0700 (MST)
> - Eve wan't chair of the WG nor even working for Sun when this
> patent issue arose.
Good to know. Again I never had a thought that she might have intended
> - I have tried to represent the Open source community when dealing
> with this issue and I recognize that Eve actaully made her best
> to try to solve this as cleanly as possible.
As you are Mr. rpmfind himself, I have every confidence of this and
> My understanding is that if you use code which claim being XPointer,
> but extend the syntax or capabilities of your code, you need to document
> those extensions, and make them available to W3C.
> As the implementor of an XPointer version I was initially annoyed by
> this and we tried to work it out so that assuming I would have inadvertantly
> derived from XPointer I would not get troubles. I was told that either the
> fact of publishing the code or have changes documented in the library
> docs would be sufficient.
That would be all well and good, bu the license explicitly says you must
notify the W3C. Why couldn't they have simply said that the doc of the
modification must be openly published?
> That was enough for me, but lawyers code is fairly inpenetrable for me
> so i would appreciate if the community manage to get something clearer from
> Sun's lawyers.
Unfortunately most of us are the IANAL crowd. I don't like what they
have, but I don't have enough law-fu to suggest a better wording.
Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant
firstname.lastname@example.org +1 303 583 9900 x 101
Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com
4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA
Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python