[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re[2]: [cgmo-webcgm] IE ActiveX Update
Tuesday, April 4, 2006, 8:17:01 PM, you wrote: > Benoit, > One quick clarification ... Where have you learned to count? ;) > At 04:49 PM 4/4/2006 -0400, you wrote: >>Hi, >> >> Microsoft is about to release some troubling IE updates for ActiveX >> controls... this is regarding the EOLAS vs Microsoft lawsuit. The >> deployment (Windows Automatic Update) of these updates will >> apparently start in April. Future versions of Windows and IE >> (pre-installed on systems) will be shipping with the update >> (specific dates unknown). >> >> A system with such an updated version of IE will require user >> interaction (via a click) before a CGM file embedded in HTML can be >> displayed on screen. A bad user experience is about to begin for CGM >> users unless they start changing their web pages. > ...embedded via <object> element, right? As far as I know (applet, embed and object). > Does this apply to *any* data format, as well as CGM, that is > embedded via <object>? I don't know all the specifics of patent, but all interactive formats being loaded by a 3rd party application. > I.e., it would apply to SVG as well, right? Yes for SVG, Flash also. > Or PNG for that matter? No. In this case, IE has native support for PNG. A 3rd party application is not required for display. > I'm curious ... is there any awareness of this within SVG WG (I haven't > seen any)? Yes there is awareness. They talked about it 2 1/2 years ago (when Microsoft lost the case). > Or for that matter, what does the HTML WG think of it? The HTML WG also talked about it years ago. I believe EOLAS only went after Microsoft and not after non-profit organizations like (Mozilla Foundation). More and more implementations (like Firefox) support namespace document natively (like HTML + SVG), so it's not a violation of the patent. This is also one of the reasons why the CDF WG was created. > Or the Hypertext Coordination Group (or whatever it's called). > Unless I'm missing what's actually affected (i.e., it would look like *any* > embedded non-HTML object), then perhaps we should add some items to the > "multiple levels" list below. Esp., what is going on in W3C and its many > affected WGs about this? The most affected technology by this is Flash. SVG is also affected, but given Adobe's attitude towards SVG lately, I'm not sure they care very much. SVG Tiny is also implemented on HTML+SVG (native) user agent and thus, does not violate the patent. -- Benoit mailto:benoit@itedo.com This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and delete this copy from your system. Thank you for your cooperation. > -Lofton. >> The workaround suggested by Microsoft, Apple, Macromedia etc... is >> to remove the <object> tag from HTML pages and add a script to every >> web page which dynamically inserts an object tag (if the <object> >> tag is dynamically inserted, it's not in violation of the EOLAS >> patent). >> >> This needs to be dealt with at multiple level... >> - CGM vendors have to deal with this (generators of HTML + CGM) >> - Users needs to update their existing web page (or block the >> update). >> - How do we (cgmopen) ease the transition for the webcgm community? >> - The test suite will need to be updated (in my opinion). >> - Some early experiences with Itedo's code base shows some problems >> with the WebCGM 2.0 'onload' param when the <object> tag is >> dynamically inserted. This may be specific to our implementation, >> but if not; the group needs to take some decisions about the >> 'onload' param. >> >> It would be good if vendors/users of this mailing list could >> collaborate about this as it affects all of us. >> >> Ralf, if some of the information is inaccurate, please let us know. >> >> Regards, >> >>-- >> Benoit mailto:benoit@itedo.com >> >>This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected >>by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware >>that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or >>any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in >>error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and >>delete this copy from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]