Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
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/~glushkoCenter 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
|
