|
|
don't lump the W3C with OASIS and WS-I on IPR
|
[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I think that Martin Lamonica got more things right with this
interview than any one I've ever done, and I especially enjoyed the
fact that he let me blame reporters for abusing "standard" in
place of "specification."
But I do want to correct one thing that I don't think I said exactly the
way he reports it here. I do think it is fair to say that
neither OASIS, W3C, nor WS-I are standards organizations according to the
definition I advanced here. But I don't think it is fair to lump
the W3C in with WS-I on either openness or IP terms, and I'd hate
for people to make that inference. The W3C worked very hard
to put a royalty-free policy in place while OASIS and WS-I have
aggressively resisted one.
And of course, as I pointed out, being a "real"
standards body doesn't imply that you have a reasonable IP policy either
or an acceptable level of openness.
--
Robert J. Glushko, Ph.D.
http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~glushko
Center for Document Engineering
http://cde.berkeley.edu
School of Information Management & Systems
102 South Hall
University of California, Berkeley CA 94720-4600
mission accomplished? here's what Bush is accomplishing...
http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~glushko/WhatBushAccomplished.gif
|
|
|
|
|
|
