Re: vCard XML DTD, standard copyrights

It is true that the W3C and IETF -RFC's are recommendations but they 
have the "force of" stanards. What I mean is that everyone assumes that 
when they read a RFC such as RFC-822 (which I seem to remember as one of 
the original works on internet based email) that everyone is compliant 
with it. And as is true with most of the IEFT - RFC's that have been 
accepted into the internet (and there are a lot that are not) the drive 
the internet and now most of the interaction between computers.  This is 
not true for most of the international standards bodies. Another point 
is that these standards bodies will "accept" the RFC or W3C 
recommendations as there starting point or as a component of their 
standards.

Re very real concern in designing and building software in the US is the 
recent inclusion of Software Patents or IP. It really is almost 
impossible to write a piece of software that does not include some form 
on Patented IP.  What the W3C has done by NOT including RAND technology 
in their recommendations is to fence off an area that allows software 
developers to create new solutions without the concern that they will be 
sued by a Microsoft, IBM, or some other entity.

International standards don't give the same protection. In fact most 
International Standards are made up of ONLY participants from 
organizations that are trying to get their IP accepted as THE standard 
as a means of controlling a market.

A good example of some of this is the RSA patents on public key 
encryption. It was not until the patents had lapsed that it was really 
used in the marketplace excepted for enterprise solutions.

I think both the W3C and IETF and all of the work groups that makeup 
their organizations and are really giving a great legacy to everyone.


Robert

On Friday, November 8, 2002, at 11:05 AM, Bill Kearney wrote:

>
>
> Also bear in mind what the W3C does it present Recommendations.  That's 
> not the
> same as a standard.  Much as RFCs are Requests For Comments.  People 
> seem to
> forget that genuine international standards bodies, like ISO, exist.
>
> Your other points about vendor dictated defacto standards are correct.
>
> In the end what gets implemented isn't always the best.  It's usually 
> the most
> widely distributed that determines what becomes considered standard.  
> This is a
> shame but it's how the market has worked up until now.
>
> -Bill Kearney
>