DanC: with diagrams in png, svg using circles-and-arrows tools
DanC: oh... don't forget generated RDF/xml
DanC: TODO: include UPS; include logical net config, as well as physical setup
DanC: TODO: nicer icons, make use of color
DanC: TODO:connect vendors, suppliers, support contacts, etc.
DanC: oh... don't forget generated RDF/xml
DanC: TODO: include UPS; include logical net config, as well as physical setup
DanC: TODO: nicer icons, make use of color
DanC: TODO:connect vendors, suppliers, support contacts, etc.
danbri: Includes a who's who.
danbri: Features a new version of Jena with improved query and storage capabilities.
danbri: Features a new version of Jena with improved query and storage capabilities.
AaronSw: A very pretty visual representation of a website
AaronSw: """The spheres in these "semantic constellations" represent documents. They are linked by arcs determined by how related the content is. Shorter distances between documents represent high similarities in content."""
AaronSw: """The spheres in these "semantic constellations" represent documents. They are linked by arcs determined by how related the content is. Shorter distances between documents represent high similarities in content."""
sat1: nice words on SW activity
DanC: I'm quite pleased that the community has found time to review the draft patent policy. A lot of the comments I've seen are based on misinformation, but I'm happy to see the dialog start.
DanC: misinformation: e.g. an assumption that the IETF's patent policy is Royalty-Free. It's not. It's RAND.
DanC: misinformation: an assumption that W3C's previous policy was Royalty-Free. It wasn't. There was no policy.
AaronSw: Thanks, DanC. This is the kind of response I wanted to hear from W3C before I was comfortable speaking about this.
DanC: folks should really study the "reciprocity requirement". It means that folks that implement W3C specs grant a license that is w.r.t. patents much like the GPL is for copyright.
DanC: the fact that we didn't invite earlier public review of this thing is unfortunate.
AaronSw: Clearly Patent Policy is an important issue, and it's one that's not really easy for most people to totally follow. People are following the simple-worded summary...which of course was written by someone who was strongly against the policy as it stands.
AaronSw: However, I think people have made their opinion clear.
DanC: careful... s/as it stands/as proposed/. There is no status-quo W3C patent policy.
AaronSw: Well it stands proposed now, no?
AaronSw: Note however that the IETF uses the two-implementations test to decide the defintion of reasonable.
DanC: those implementations can be from folks that licensed the relevant patents, meanwhile.
DanC: some factual info: 20 Aug "backgrounder"/release draft itself
AaronSw: Eben Moglen on behalf of the FSF
AaronSw: Richard M. Stallman
DanC: public comment archive, recently filled with responses via linuxtoday, slashdot
AaronSw: Janet Daly
AaronSw: John Gilmore
AaronSw: [Russ Nelson got the last word in before the deadline]: NO PROPRIETARY STANDARDS, IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM.
AaronSw: Rob Levin, head of operations for this IRC network
AaronSw: Ken Coar, VP of Apache Software Foundation
AaronSw: John Sowa
AaronSw: Chris Lilley, W3C Team shares his concerns
AaronSw: James Clark
AaronSw: Florian Weimer provides some very substantive comments