Re: XPointer and Sun patent

[Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@qub.com>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Paul W. Abrahams <abrahams@valinet.com>

> Seems to me that by the statement "XPointer is affected by a
> technology patent held by Sun Microsystems.", the XPointer
> spec is assuming the validity of the patent.   Couldn't W3C
> cover its backside without endorsing the patent by replacing
> "is" by "might be"?
> 
> Paul Abrahams
> 
> 

Now I understand. Right. The special thing about XPointer is 
that XPointer WD appears to be the only (?) W3C document 
which tells that "Sun has a patent related to XPointer".

Then XPointer WD provides the url to some letter 
where *Sun* ( not W3C ) is talking about some terms and 
conditions, saying that "If you do something with that W3C 
paper, ( or it's future version ) we can make you some trouble".

Either W3C gave some permission to Sun to say 
such things or saying those things is Sun's 
own initiative.

Does it matter?

I don't think W3C and Sun have made this by 'mistake'. 

Sun says:

""XPointer Specification" shall mean the W3C XML Pointer Language
(XPointer) Version 1.0 Specification defining the XML Pointer Language,
referred to as XPointer, or any future version of the specification."

( "any future versions" !!!! )  You think W3C is not aware of such 
a claim? This is not possible, I think.

So there is some hidden deal between Sun and W3C 
( W3C is a special club, where big companies are making 
new standards and other deals. Hello? Where are the 
news? ) 

Nothing special again, I think. Nothing special with XPointer. 
This particular deal just looks a bit more ugly than usual, 
but nothing special here.

If W3C wants to leave this hole open - it is W3C decision 
to do that in the way they did. Why should we guess
is Sun making some claim on it's own or maybe the claim 
is backed by W3C ? Hello! Nobody knows what happens
in the club. Nobody knows, nobody should know and 
nobody will know. 

If W3C wants to leave the Namespaces hole open - it is 
again W3C decision to do that in the way they did. 

What you're proposing *can not* cover W3C's backside, 
because it *does not matter* what is written on the XPointer 
WD.

What matters is what Sun says in their license. 

If you remove any pointers to Sun's license from  the 
XPointer WD - what will it change ??? Nothing !!!!

Rgds.Paul.

PS. It seems that if it will go as it goes,  the best 
way to 'cover W3C backside' soon could be not only 
to close the archives, but also to remove each and 
every email and personal information from W3C 
papers. I wish that will not happen. ;-)