OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: ISO intellectual property (was Standards)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Brownell [
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 6:56 PM
> To: Bullard, Claude L (Len); Winchel 'Todd' Vincent III; Tom Bradford
> Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: ISO intellectual property (was Standards)
> Also, what to do about the vendor community
> that's touting W3C specs as "standards", while
> W3C has been at best sluggish to fill in essential
> gaps like conformance testing and what might be
> called "brand maintainence".  (Vendors seem free
> to use the W3C trademarks without being notably
> spec-conformant...)

This touches on another big difference (as I understand it)
between "real" international standards and what the W3C does.
If BigBozoCo claims to implement an ISO standard (ISO 9000,
maybe), and it turns out that they are just kinda sorta
working within the "spirit" of ISO 9000 but don't ACTUALLY
have people waste their valuable time filling out those
boring documents, someone (ISO? a government? a disgruntled
customer?) is likely to take legal action against them.  But
if BigBozoCo's claims to implement the W3C XML Schema spec, and
it turns out that they didn't actually have the developers waste their
valuable time implementing all those boring
types or content models, nobody can do anything except whine about it.

Is this not true?