Re: XPointer and the '729 patent

[Ben Trafford <ben@legendary.org>]

At 12:48 PM 2/16/2001 -0500, Eve L. Maler wrote:
>After reviewing and considering the comments that have been submitted
>since the time of the posting, we offer to do the following:
>
>1 Request a reexamination of the '729 Patent at our own expense.
>
>    As part of the reexamination, we request that you provide us with
>    any prior art of which you are aware so that Sun may submit any
>    relevant prior art to the U.S. Patent Office.
>
>2 Consider specific requests for changes to the terms.
>
>    In order to accommodate the concerns of the development community,
>    we are willing to consider alternative terms.  We have already
>    received some comments along these lines, and additional comments
>    are welcome.
>
>Information on BOTH prior art and suggested changes to the terms should
>be sent to Sun by 7 MARCH 2001 at mailto:729-patent@east.sun.com.
>
>We are hopeful that this explanation addresses the concerns voiced to
>date, and look forward to seeing your additional comments.

         <cheerleading quality="blatant">

         Hurray for Sun! This is the kind of reaction that vastly 
encourages good relations among those of us developing standards work. And 
a special thanks to Eve for seeing this matter through.

         I think I'll be sleeping better this evening...and doubtlessly, 
even better once we see the final resolution of this matter. I'm convinced 
it'll be positive. I will certainly be submitting my own comments to the 
email address provided by Sun.

         </cheerleading>

--->Ben Trafford