- From: Richard M. Smith <rms@computerbytesman.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 17:23:23 -0500
- To: "'W3C Public Web Plugins List'" <public-web-plugins@w3.org>
Thanks. What a novel concept! Who would have ever guessed that you could represent a word processing document file as an XML file. ;-) Richard -----Original Message----- From: Robin Cover [mailto:robin@isogen.com] Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 5:16 PM To: Richard M. Smith Cc: W3C Public Web Plugins List Subject: Re: Microsoft seeks XML-related patents See: http://l2.espacenet.com/espacenet/bnsviewer?CY=gb&LG=en&DB=EPD&PN=EP1376387& ID=EP+++1376387A2+I+ -rcc ----------------------------------------------------- Robin Cover XML Cover Pages WWW: http://xml.coverpages.org Newsletter: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletter.html ISOGEN: rcover@innodata-isogen.com OASIS: robin.cover@oasis-open.org On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, Richard M. Smith wrote: > http://news.com.com/2100-1013_3-5146581.html?tag=nefd_top > > Microsoft seeks XML-related patents > > Last modified: January 23, 2004, 12:24 PM PST > By David <mailto:david.becker@cnet.com?subject=FEEDBACK:Microsoft seeks > XML-related patents> Becker > Staff Writer, CNET News.com > > <http://news.com.com/2102-1013_3-5146581.html?tag=st_util_print> Print > story <http://news.com.com/2113-1013_3-5146581.html?tag=st_util_email> > E-mail story <javascript:void(0)> > > Microsoft has applied for patents that could prevent competing applications > from reading documents created with the latest version of the software > giant's Office program. > > The company filed similar patent > <http://dw.com.com/redir?destUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fv3.espacenet.com%2Ftextdoc%3FD > B%3DEPODOC%26IDX%3DEP1376387%26QPN%3DEP1376387&siteId=3&oId=2100-1013-514658 > 1&ontId=7343&lop=nl_ex> applications in New Zealand and the European Union > that cover word processing documents stored in the XML (Extensible Markup > Language) format. The proposed patent would cover methods for an application > other than the original word processor to access data in the document. The > U.S. Patent Office had no record of a similar application. > > .... > > > >
Received on Friday, 23 January 2004 17:23:30 UTC