RE: What a prior art product must do

If we can assume that the XML and XSLT support is built into a browser,
then I don't believe there is a problem.  INAL, YMMV, etc.

Another interesting question does the use of the <script src=> tag ever
get into trouble with Eolas patent.  Part the answer to this question is
if the JavaScript interpreter is considered part of the browser or if it
is an external program.

Richard

-----Original Message-----
From: public-web-plugins-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-web-plugins-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Scott Cadillac
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 11:45 AM
To: public-web-plugins@w3.org
Subject: RE: What a prior art product must do



Thank you for correcting my assumption Richard,

I guess it shows that I haven't spent much time with Java :-)

Any thoughts on my question about embedded XML and external calls to
other
XML and XSL/XSLT?

Scott Cadillac,
XML-Extranet - http://xmlx.ca
403-281-6090 - scott@xmlx.ca
Well-formed Development
--
Extranet solutions using C# .NET, Witango, MSIE and XML


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-web-plugins-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-web-plugins-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> Richard M. Smith
> Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 6:01 AM
> To: public-web-plugins@w3.org
> Subject: RE: What a prior art product must do
> 
> 
> 
> A quick guess of what Eolas might be thinking.  In claim #1, a Java
> class file is the embedded file and the external application 
> is the JVM.
> 
> 
> The '906 patent was filed before Java applets existed, so it shouldn't
> be too surprising that they are not described in the patent text.
> Regardless it doesn't mean that embedded applets can't infringe the
> patent.
> 
> Richard
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-web-plugins-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-web-plugins-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Scott Cadillac
> Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 3:39 AM
> To: public-web-plugins@w3.org
> Subject: RE: What a prior art product must do
> 
> 
> 
> I think you have a good point Christian,
> 
> The Virtual Machine and/or .NET Runtime does exist outside of the
> Browser,
> but I guess a more low-level technical breakdown of how the Browser
> accesses
> the Machine/Runtime would be helpful here.
> 
> Scanning quickly through some of the press stuff at
> http://www.eolas.com/news.html I saw a few general references to the
> phrase
> "applet" to imply that Java apps are supposedly covered in the Patent.
> 
> Obviously I haven't read the entire Patent Text, but a quick 
> word search
> doesn't return anything about "applet" or "java" or "virtual" 
> (the Text
> pre-dates .NET of course).
> 
> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HIT
> OFF&d=PALL
> &p=1
> &u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,838,906.WKU.&OS=PN/
> 5,838,906&
> RS=P
> N/5,838,906
> 
> Is Eolas stretching their own interpretation?
> 
> Or is the simple act of invoking an external process from the Browser
> that
> returns anything enough for the Patent?
> 
> 
> This is the part that worries me. I don't actually use 
> embedded objects
> as a
> rule in my work, but I heavily rely on XML, specifically the 
> client-side
> XML
> Databinding support that MSIE has.
> 
> Using the HTML <XML/> element in MSIE, and ActiveXObject() 
> via Jscript,
> I
> routinely call external XML data and XSL files that are delivered
> dynamically from a Server-side process.
> 
> Once the external data arrives back at the page that called it, user
> and/or
> dynamic interaction occurs.
> 
> Could client-side XSLT be considered Hypermedia? It is a mixing of
> different
> types of data for viewing in a Browser after all.
> 
> Any thoughts on whether this sort of stuff is at risk?
> 
> I sure wish we had more information....
> 
> Scott Cadillac,
> XML-Extranet - http://xmlx.ca
> 403-281-6090 - scott@xmlx.ca
> Well-formed Development
> --
> Extranet solutions using C# .NET, Witango, MSIE and XML
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-web-plugins-request@w3.org 
> > [mailto:public-web-plugins-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> > SerpentMage (Christian Gross)
> > Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 12:36 AM
> > To: Jake Robb
> > Cc: W3C Public Web Plugins List
> > Subject: Re: What a prior art product must do
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Jake Robb wrote:
> > 
> > >The Java Virtual Machine and the Common Language Runtime 
> > would count as
> > >applications, which must be loaded in order for Java and 
> > .NET code to run.
> > >I think that voids your loophole.
> > >
> > Yes, but my point is that the runtime is loaded when the browser is 
> > running.  Hence when the "plugin" runs the runtime will already be 
> > running.  There is no additional executable to run...
> > 
> > Christian Gross
> > 
>

Received on Sunday, 31 August 2003 14:12:50 UTC