Hi Matthieu, Le mer 15/12/2004 à 21:38, Matthieu Fuzellier a écrit : > There is still an issue in the pubrules checker [2] : > [3] report that the working group is under PP : W3C Patent Policy but > the document says Current Patent Practice (CPP). > > I'm not yet familiar with this PP problems... Dom any suggestion? The checker is indeed wrong on this one; now that IPP can handle CPP documents for groups under the Patent Policy, the pubrules checker expects that any spec not listed as CPP in IPP should be under the Patent Policy. But this is too high an assumption given that not all groups under the Patent Policy are using IPP to handle their CPP specs. If you can't make any sense of the paragraph above, that's OK :) Paul, if you're interested in moving the CPP specs of XML Core to IPP - so that the patent disclosures get handled uniformly for all your specs - please get in touch with me and Ian. HTH, Dom > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xinclude-20041220/ > [2] > http://www.w3.org/2000/06/webdata/xslt?xslfile=http://www.w3.org/2001/07/pubrules-checker&doc_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fw3.org%2FTR%2F2004%2FREC-xinclude-20041220%2F&auth=no&recursive=1&xmlfile=http%3A%2F%2Fcgi.w3.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Ftidy-if%3FdocAddr%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fw3.org%252FTR%252F2004%252FREC-xinclude-20041220%252F > [3] http://www.w3.org/Member/Mail/ -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ W3C/ERCIM mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 16 December 2004 08:48:27 UTC