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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] Typing and paranoia

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

That was why I was asking.   I see the worry in that 
dimension.  On the other hand, unless the technical 
need for the binary infoset is strong, neither the 
unencumbered or encumbered gadget will be used widely.

The test seems to be if a W3C WG or others can 
come up with a binary infoset that is generally useful 
for more than a few applications and isn't encumbered.  

1.  A requirements statement is needed that will pass
    Tim and other's objections.  Presumably, those in 
    industries whose applications need this and are not 
    MPEG members would step up to that.  Why haven't they?

2. One would want to be aware of the MPEG patents as the 
   affect the design of the gadget-to-be-standardized-and-open.
   What are the alternatives to encumbered BiM approaches?  They 
   used a schema-based system.  I wouldn't think one could patent 
   that but I've been surprised before.

BTW:  as you probably know, the VRML/X3D guys want this too 
and ran headlong into MPEG a while ago.  I suspect the Web3D 
CAD WG will want it too.  What about the SVG community?


From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin.berjon@expway.fr]

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> And the encumbrances of MPEG7 are?

Solid and heavy of course, what else do you expect from MPEG-style consortia? 
It's pretty much "patent it or the others in the group will do it for you". And 
it will be the exact same thing in all consortia that have similar patent 
policies and that create their own binary infosets.

Maybe you're starting to see why I'm worried?


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS