Re: SVG & XPointer - When I write SVG code can I be sued?

[Robin Berjon <robin@knowscape.com>]

At 12:00 18/01/2001 -0500, AndrewWatt2000@aol.com wrote:
>> At 11:28 18/01/2001 -0500, AndrewWatt2000@aol.com wrote:
>>  >The W3C XPointer specification acknowledges the validity of a Sun patent. 
>>  >a consequence when anyone either "downloads" or "implements" XPointer ... 
>>  
>>  implement XPointer != use Xpointer.
>
>If only it were that straightforward.
>
>Here is a definition from the "Terms and Conditions" ...<quote>"Modification" 
>shall mean programming code, including interfaces, developed by or for You 
>for use in an implementation of the syntax of the Xpointer Specification .... 
></quote>
>
>SVG is programming code which implements the syntax of the XPointer 
>specification, or more precisely a subset of it. Are you suggesting that SVG 
>is anything other than "programming code"?

I believe you totally misparse that sentence. "programming code" is meant
as in "developing code", not programming language. SVG is probably not a
programming language anyway, but I don't think entering that debate will
make much difference.

Yes I am, and in any case, SVG does not _implement_ XPointer. It uses it.
An SVG processor does implement the bare bones syntax. If you believe you
have implemented XPointer in SVG, I'd like to see that.

>I hope we get a clear, unequivocal response from Sun that there is no problem.

In any case, even if it applied, I don't think Sun can risk a wreck-the-web
kind of action.

-- robin b.
Let us think the unthinkable, let us do the undoable. Let us prepare to
grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.
-- Dirk Gently (Douglas Adams)