- From: Hal Lockhart <hal.lockhart@oracle.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 14:18:31 -0700 (PDT)
- To: public-xmlsec@w3.org
It has been drawn to my attention that the W3C Patent Policy, Section 8.2 says: ---- "The following are expressly excluded from and shall not be deemed to constitute Essential Claims:" [...] "2. claims which would be infringed only by:" [...] "o the implementation of technology developed elsewhere and merely incorporated by reference in the body of the Recommendation." ---- It seems to me that this is exactly the case in signature and encryption 1.1. The actual use of ECDSA is specified in a NIST standard, which appears as a normative reference in the W3C documents. My conclusion is that we could choose to move forward with the specs as they stand and still be in compliance with the W3C Patent Policy. Therefore it would not be necessary to reformulate portions of the specs from normative to informative. Are there members of this WG who advocate that we should exceed the requirements of the W3C Patent Policy for some reason? Hal
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2010 21:21:10 UTC