Is OPC becoming independant from COM/DCOM?

C

Curt Wuollet

Yes, but one must then risk MS patenting and control of XML. It is theoretically a far less MS centric quantity to deal with, but there is the spectre of "submarine" patents and other IP issues not explicitly Open. If it must be structured in a particular way to comply with the monopoly implementation, the effect is not remarkably different than if they claim ownership outright.

Regards

cww
 
A

Andrey Romanenko

Curt,

> Yes, but one must then risk MS patenting and control of XML. It is
> theoretically a far less MS centric quantity to deal with, but there
> is the spectre of "submarine" patents and other IP issues not explicitly
> Open. <

You got it almost right. It is not MS in this case, though. Those who want to know more are referred to Appendix A of OPC XML-DA Specification.

> If it must be structured in a particular way to comply with the
> monopoly implementation, the effect is not remarkably different than if
> they claim ownership outright. <

Curt, are you challenging patent law :) ?

Andrey
 
C

Curt Wuollet

Hi Andrey

> Curt,
>
> On April 4, 2005, Curt Wuollet wrote:
>>Yes, but one must then risk MS patenting and control of XML. It is
>>theoretically a far less MS centric quantity to deal with, but there
>>is the spectre of "submarine" patents and other IP issues not explicitly
>>Open. <
>
> You got it almost right. It is not MS in this case, though. Those who want to
> know more are referred to Appendix A of OPC XML-DA Specification. <

I think then it would be most accurate to state: It is not _only_ MS in this case.

>>If it must be structured in a particular way to comply with the
>>monopoly implementation, the effect is not remarkably different than if
>>they claim ownership outright. <
>
> Curt, are you challenging patent law :) ? <

Most emphatically! Software patents are pure BS and destructive in the strictest sense of the word. And if everyone can patent their XML schema, what possible use can it be in Opening anything? Soon my C compiler will be useless as they'll issue patents for anything I could write. We'll have to pay the lawyers who patented the for-next loop. Sure, there's prior art, but who can afford to fight it out?

Regards

cww
 
Top