[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
let me get this straight....
cgi is not affected because there is no local interaction
plugins for flash, real player, tcl, java, etc are. some may already be
licenced others need to be?
or is it the ability of the browser to support plugins which has to be
licenced in which case explorer, mozilla, etc have to be licenced?
javascript is part of the browser and if it provides local dynamic
controls that's ok because it's not downloaded, only the code - or is
that covered too?
i know this slightly off topic, but it could significantly affect the
utility of xml in the browser environment....
rick
On Tue, 2003-08-19 at 00:44, Robin Berjon wrote:
> AndrewWatt2000@aol.com wrote:
> > Can you be confident that nobody holds a patent for mixing elements from
> > different namespaces?
>
> No, but I'm fairly confident it's not covered by this patent. If we start
> fearing patents for everything we do, then we do nothing. The plugin way is
> completely blocked and an alternative must be found. I believe intermixed
> XHTML+SVG is not only a superior replacement for a Flash plugin embedded in tag
> soup, it is also the only option not covered by this patent (apart from
> base64-encoding your Flash in the src parameter of your objects and praying that
> browsers understand data: URIs).
|
