Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[roseway]

I know I shouldn't take pleasure from this, but I'm going to anyway.

All those crocodile tears from Microsoft about how other organisations are violating their patents, and it turns out that one of their premier products includes a serious violation of somebody else's patent.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/microsoft/6015902/Microsoft-banned-from-selling-Word-in-US.html

[tickmike]

You beet me to it  I was just going to post this link 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8197990.stm

It will be interesting to see the outcome.

[kitz]

All those crocodile tears from Microsoft about how other organisations are violating their patents, and it turns out that one of their premier products includes a serious violation of somebody else's patent.

Indeed.


However it would be interesting to know more about which xml element and just what they have broken.

XML is used by many applications not just word..  the 'language' can be specifically modified and schemas developed to support many different applications.  Not just word processing, but many other types of applications may fall back on some sort of XML schema, (XML itself falls back on SGML) eg MCML for music.. the whole idea of XML allows you to build specialist extensions to allow compatibility between various software.

If MS have broken or used a schema or used a DTD or DOM or whatever  that has been patented (wasnt aware that they were patented), I should imagine there would be a relitively easy work around for them to define another... down to the basics youre talking like changing <image> to say <img>.
How this would then affect older versions Ive word Ive no idea?  would they need to release a patch?

... but then again Ive forgotten most of what I knew about XML because i never really got my head around the real indepth stuff properly. 

[sevenlayermuddle]

I have heard it suggested that's it's too easy to get anything you like patented these days.  For an extreme Australian example, see

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1418165.stm

Still, getting the patent to stand up in court is impressive, and these guys do seem to have passed that hurdle.

[kitz]

hmmm..  I couldnt resist and opened up one of my degree assignments from several years ago to refresh my memory...  snipped from my 43 page essay.   
Please bear in mind this is several years old now (2002) and at the time there was little info as xml was still in its relative infancy then.

XML lets you choose the tag names you want and specify your own attributes. (See the DTD section below) -  The schema defines the structure of the given document.  Therefore if you want to create a document using custom tags such as <myTag> or <kitzTag> to describe the data, you can.  To be able to read your XML data though you must provide the definition of how the document is structured and which tags are used to describe the data.

XML doesn’t specify how to present the data to an end user - it is only concerned with describing the data that can be manipulated and presented.  Because XML is just text, any application can understand it as long as the program understands the character encoding in use.

Many previously incompatible applications are now able to share information by using what is called a DOM (Document Object Module – see below).  In the past, to share data between applications, involved exporting the data into a text file, which was then imported into the new document. Even then there were problems as Microsoft’s Excel exported the data into a comma separated value (CSV) text file, which some applications were unable to comprehend as they use fixed length values, tabs, or other special characters.

/snip .. lots of in depth stuff...  /

DTD (Document Type Definitions)

Although XML is mainly used on the World Wide Web, it also is extremely useful for formatting documents that allow applications to be able to share data.

When an application knows the XML file structure, a component within the application can work with the data in the XML file to be able to perform certain tasks.  The DTD is what enables this to occur as this is what advises the application how to read the data. The idea of using a DTD was taken from SGML

Defining a DTD allows different systems to exchange data without having to worry about what format the originating data was stored in (or what type it is) as the DTD sets out rules and defines each element within the XML language.

/..snip...  more in depth stuff ../

now an interesting bit which may or may not have anything to do with it..  as I cba to read my whole essay again! 

XML Schemas

As previously mentioned working with DTDs could be difficult, so why couldn’t a DTD be designed so the XML document structure could be validated by a document that actually looks like XML?

XML–DR Schema was originally proposed by Microsoft to the W3C who looked at this and several other proposals.  The result was an XML schema standard that was in an XML-like syntax and gave more overall power and flexibility for describing XML documents.   The XML schema became an official W3C recommendation in May 2001.

Anyhow sorry this has now gone a bit OT...   


if M$ has nicked someone elses idea..  then they shouldnt get credit and good luck to the other company for being able to take them to task on it.

[roseway]

Thankfully we don't have software patents in the UK (or in most of Europe). It's quite obvious that it's impossible to administer software patents in a fair way, because only rich powerful companies can afford the costs. The result is that the rich bullies like Microsoft get thousands of patents granted for techniques which they may or may not have invented, and their patent applications (in the US at least) more or less go through on the nod, because the task of searching for prior publication is far beyond the resources of most companies and non-commercial organisations.

I'm liable to rant on this subject, so I'll stop there.

[kitz]

It's quite obvious that it's impossible to administer software patents in a fair way, because only rich powerful companies can afford the costs.

 The result is that the rich bullies like Microsoft get thousands of patents granted for techniques which they may or may not have invented, and their patent applications (in the US at least) more or less go through on the nod, because the task of searching for prior publication is far beyond the resources of most companies and non-commercial organisations.

Agreed

[tickmike]

I also agree

[roseway]

If anyone has got the time and the inclination, the arguments against software patents can be read here.

You may need an ice pack on your head.

[kitz]

pass