Karl Dubost's dashboard

I don't think that comments like this are useful.

The W3C, IETF, OASIS, and other formal standards bodies do a lot of useful work. There are communities creating open specifications in ad-hoc fashions and those are the ones OWF is mainly looking to help out. – daveman692, on July 25, 2008 08:31

I don't think that comments like this are useful.

The W3C, IETF, OASIS, and other formal standards bodies do a lot of useful work. There are communities creating open specifications in ad-hoc fashions and those are the ones OWF is mainly looking to help out. – daveman692, on July 25, 2008 08:31

My guess is that for a lot of specs that need to have clean IPR hygiene, but aren't really concerned with official status (at least in the short term), the OWF will probably be the end of the line (in terms of standardization).

But for some things, you *have* to go to formal standards bodies. There are literally some orgs that can't use specs that don't come from ISO, for example.

This org is an attempt to make the mechanics of around IPR become "non issues" for communities of interest around technologies (to the extent such a community is interested in making a truly open web - if someone has patents and doesn't want to participate - there's nothing much that can be done there).

My guess is that for a lot of specs that need to have clean IPR hygiene, but aren't really concerned with official status (at least in the short term), the OWF will probably be the end of the line (in terms of standardization).

But for some things, you *have* to go to formal standards bodies. There are literally some orgs that can't use specs that don't come from ISO, for example.

This org is an attempt to make the mechanics of around IPR become "non issues" for communities of interest around technologies (to the extent such a community is interested in making a truly open web - if someone has patents and doesn't want to participate - there's nothing much that can be done there).

I admit to being a bit worried about proliferation of bodies wrestling with standards. The Web was a new and specialized subset of the Internet, so W3C made sense to me in addition to IETF. In my ignorance of the discussions leading to this one however, I am uncertain as to just what is being reacted to by whom and why. – jeffs, on July 24, 2008 20:29

I admit to being a bit worried about proliferation of bodies wrestling with standards. The Web was a new and specialized subset of the Internet, so W3C made sense to me in addition to IETF. In my ignorance of the discussions leading to this one however, I am uncertain as to just what is being reacted to by whom and why. – jeffs, on July 24, 2008 20:29

Not many people seemed to have answered yet. But I will ping Daniel Glazman, CSS WG co-chair, when people have voiced what they want. :)