Ted,
If that happens, don't you think that we would be
obliged to object to their claims?
IMO, such claims would be easily defeated on the
same basis as most "look & feel" claims have been beaten
in the past. In fact, I am not aware of issues with any
sort of rights assertion relative to existing converters
for MS (or Adobe) document formats.
--
Eric
--> -----Original Message-----
--> From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]
--> On Behalf Of Theodore Ts'o
--> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 12:03 PM
--> To: John C Klensin
--> Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
--> Subject: Re: Alternative formats for IDs
-->
--> On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 02:59:34PM -0500, John C Klensin wrote:
--> > (2) Development of a converter between the MS-XML output
--> > of Word Pro 2003 and the XML input of RFC 2629bis so
--> > that xml2rfc and its friends could take responsibility
--> > for final formatting. Note that, if the converter were
--> > two-way, you could edit happily in Word and others could
--> > edit happily in XML and both could interwork. However,
--> > as with the above, I think this solution would rapidly
--> > deteriorate into uselessness unless there were a
--> > commitment to produce new versions as new versions of
--> > Office appeared -- at least until Microsoft stabilizes
--> > and documents their XML formats.
-->
--> And even when Microsoft stablizes their XML formats, each person who
--> wants to use the converter will have to apply individually to
--> Microsoft for a patent license, for which Microsoft has apparently
--> reserved the right to deny in the future for any reason. Sweet....
-->
--> - Ted
-->
--> _______________________________________________
--> Ietf mailing list
--> Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
--> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
-->
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf