• From: "Paul W. Abrahams" <abrahams@v...>
• To: Daniel.Veillard@i...
• Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 18:03:36 -0500

Daniel Veillard wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 07:12:29PM -0500, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
> > Seems to me that by the statement "XPointer is affected by a
> > technology patent held by Sun Microsystems.", the XPointer
> > spec is assuming the validity of the patent.   Couldn't W3C
> > cover its backside without endorsing the patent by replacing
> > "is" by "might be"?
>
>   Yes, that's a problem, I don't think W3C did intent to endorse
> the patent validity, but unfortunately the text signaling the claim
> seems to present it as accepted. I'm pretty sure this will be
> corrected.

Does my suggested text replacement make the appropriate correction?

Paul Abrahams

• References:
  • XPointer and Sun patent
    • From: "Paul W. Abrahams" <abrahams@v...>
  • Re: XPointer and Sun patent
    • From: Daniel Veillard <Daniel.Veillard@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Excel to XML
• Next by Date: RE: Excel to XML
• Previous by thread: Re: XPointer and Sun patent
• Next by thread: Re: XPointer and Sun patent
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread