XML.orgXML.org
FOCUS AREAS |XML-DEV |XML.org DAILY NEWSLINK |REGISTRY |RESOURCES |ABOUT
OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] Should one adopt the tag naming convention of anexisting XML vocabulary or create one's own tag naming convention?

If you still don’t know what it means, Michael, then the lawyers were successful.  Truly, their goal is to obtain the broadest possible scope in a claim, so any ambiguity is calculated, not accidental.

 

Bruce B Cox

OCIO/AED/Software Architecture and Engineering Division

571-272-9004

 

From: Michael Kay [mailto:mike@saxonica.com]
Sent: 2012 February 6, Monday 19:14
To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Should one adopt the tag naming convention of an existing XML vocabulary or create one's own tag naming convention?

 

On 06/02/2012 23:32, Cox, Bruce wrote:

To give an example, the patent business model has been very stable for about a hundred years.  True, the vocabulary has changed

Really? As far as I can see, patents still use the word "plurality" as often as they can, and I still don't know if it means "one or more", "two or more", or "zero or more".

Michael Kay
Saxonica



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]


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

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS