Re: Place under sun (was: XPointer and Sun patent)

[Alexey Gokhberg <alexei@bluewin.ch>]

Hello

> 
> Alexey Gokhberg wrote:
> 
> > CONCLUSION: The complete implementation of XSLT 1.0 using the platform
> > other than Java is not possible without the permission from Sun
> > Microsystems, Inc.
> 

Matt Sergeant wrote:

>
> Yikes. I always thought it was incredibly stupid they didn't use printf
> formatting (a format that every other language on the planet appears to
> use, except Java (yes I'm exagherating, but its not much of a stretch)),
> ...
>
> May we have word from the WG why printf formatting wasn't chosen? Was it
> just to ease implementation for Java?
> 

??? - Did I ever mention "printf" in my writing? Or did I argue whether
the *technique* choosen by W3C for number formatting is wrong??

This is not a technical issue! It does not matter which formatting
technique is the best - of Java, of C, of C++, of Ada, of Cobol, ... The
fact that Java developers have certain benefits implementing the
specification does not matter too (or it does ?). The principal point
is, that the public specification has no right to use the
privately-owned specification as its integral part.

If authors of XSLT 1.0 recommendation had chosen the JDK 1.1 number
formatting model, they had to include the complete and precise
specification in the main body of the recommendation itself, instead  of
referring to the external document which contains the intellectual
property of the private organization. If inclusion of the appropriate
specification into W3C document is legally forbidden (and I beleive, it
is in case of JDK 1.1), then W3C simply has no right to choose the
technique in question, no matter how good this technique is.

Kind regards

Alexey

P.S. I would not be much interested to know from W3C why they didn't
choose "printf". I would appreciate, however, if W3C folks will submit
some feedback on the subject discussed on this thread.