Toward a happy end for the Sun/XPointer saga?
08:05, 25 Apr 2001 UTC | Eric van der Vlist

Eve Maler posted a revised intellectual property statement that Sun has submitted to the W3C for its XPointer specification.

The new IPR has been revised to take into account the many comments from the community on the previous release:

Thanks to everyone who sent comments on the XPointer terms and conditions that Sun published.  We have gone through all the comments carefully and developed the IPR statement attached below.  I just submitted this to W3C.

This new version is much shorter and appears to more clearly restrict its scope to:

patent or patent application that would necessarily be infringed upon implementation of XPointer

and excludes:

enabling technologies that may be necessary to make or use any product or portion thereof that complies with XPointer but are not themselves expressly set forth in XPointer (e.g., semiconductor manufacturing technology, compiler technology, object oriented technology, basic operating system technology, and the like)

As the language of this text is somewhat obscure to non-lawyers, Andrew Watt suggested creating an explanation in plain English:

Is there a translation into English? That could be very useful.

Other stories:

Re: Toward a happy end for the Sun/XPointer saga? (Guy Macon - 10:52, 20 May 2003)

I, too, would like a translation into English. I couldn't figure out what the lawyers are saying.

Guy Macon, electrical engineer http://www.guymacon.com/FUN/QUESTION/INDEX.HTM

xmlhack: developer news from the XML community

Front page | Search | Find XML jobs

Related categories