W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org > October 2001

Review procedure

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 11:53:33 +0100
To: <scott_k_peterson@hp.com>, <www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDIEDNCCAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

I am convinced by the argument that the process for public comment has been

See for instance:



It seems particularly dubious to have only one period in which public
comments are accepted and to short circuit normal processes such as making a
working draft available before a last call draft, and having a Candidate
Recommendation phase.



I note the following guidance:

"The Working Group estimates which W3C Working Groups and other parties
should review the last call draft. It is preferable to secure review
commitments before announcing the last call. "

The rush of last minute comments suggest that the Working Group failed to
estimate clearly which other parties have a clear interest in review of the
last call draft; and singularly failed to secure review commitments.

The draft states "we believe Consortium policy regarding the interaction of
patent rights and Web standards is of significant importance to the
community-at-large, so we are seeking public comment". Following this, it is
reasonable to extend the comments period to allow deeper public review.

Contentfully: I am concerned about the building block nature of Web
A genuinely useful standard is used as a building block by other standards;
any standard produced under RAND is then unusable as a building block by a
RF standard. I think this is likely to undermine the overall standardization
effort of the W3C.

Jeremy Carroll

Please note: this message is my personal opinion; Scott represents HP's
official opinion.
Received on Monday, 1 October 2001 06:53:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:06:44 UTC