OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ebxml-msg message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] FW: [ebxml-cppa] IBM patent disclosure


Title: RE: [ebxml-msg] FW: [ebxml-cppa] IBM patent disclosure
I don't think we need to withdraw v2 from the approval process.  This may be as simple as putting something in the errata, for section 1.2.3, which says something like:
 
    Throughout this specification, reference is made to the work
    of the CPPA working group.  This is not meant as an endorsement
    or as a requirement.  Any equivalent means of storing
    configuration information is acceptable.
 
Regards,
 
David.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jacques Durand [mailto:JDurand@fsw.fujitsu.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 3:24 PM
To: 'Martin W Sachs'; David Fischer
Cc: ebXML Msg
Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] FW: [ebxml-cppa] IBM patent disclosure

It is true that the MS specification is explicit about the fact that
a CPA document is not needed. The CPAId, if present, "MAY reference an
instance of a CPA". It is only required to identify a set of conversation parameters.
Two MSHs involved in the same conversation, are only required to identify the
same set of parameters based on the CPAId.

However, remain many wordings in the spec that "assume" the use
of a CPA doc, describing normative material
by making explicit references to CPA elements. An example:
"The DuplicateElimination element MUST NOT be present if the CPA has
duplicateElimination set to never".

So there seems to be some - maybe just editorial? - inconsistency here.

The most radical way to really make MS non-depending on CPA, is to remove
all direct normative references to "CPA" and CPA elements, such as above.
But there has to be some other way to refer to the agreement parameters that
govern a conversation...
One way is to introduce a "conversation mode agreement" (say, CMA) entity,
containing the small subset of MS-relevant CPA parameters.
This "CMA" is a change, but not as major as it looks. Does not even need be described
as an XML document. Only as a list of abstract conversation parameters with possible values.
The description of how this CMA maps to a CPA elements, is non-normative.
Incidentally, that would make it easier for implementors to capture
the parameters needed to "configure" a conversation.
Just an idea, knowing that its feasibility is low, late at this stage...

Regards,

Jacques


-----Original Message-----
From: Martin W Sachs [mailto:mwsachs@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 7:33 AM
To: David Fischer
Cc: ebXML Msg
Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] FW: [ebxml-cppa] IBM patent disclosure



We don't require a CPA in messaging.  We expended a great deal of time and
effort to make sure that the MSG spec is correct while not requiring a CPA.
Whether you want to advise users to configure their systems manually
instead of using a CPA is an entirely different question.

It won't serve anyone well to pull V2 back from the OASIS approval process
at this point if that's what you have in mind.

Regards,
Marty

*************************************************************************************

Martin W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
*************************************************************************************


                                                                                                                                          

                      David Fischer                                                                                                       

                      <david@drummondgr        To:       ebXML Msg <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>                                       

                      oup.com>                 cc:                                                                                        

                                               Subject:  [ebxml-msg] FW: [ebxml-cppa] IBM patent disclosure                               

                      04/24/2002 09:49                                                                                                    

                      AM                                                                                                                  

                                                                                                                                          

                                                                                                                                          



We need to seriously consider whether we require CPPA in Messaging.  If IBM
requires a license to use CPPA, that could easily transfer to Messaging
based
upon this requirement.

Regards,

David Fischer
Drummond Group.

-----Original Message-----
From: David Fischer [mailto:david@drummondgroup.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 8:45 AM
To: ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org
Cc: Rik Drummond
Subject: RE: [ebxml-cppa] IBM patent disclosure


I logged on this morning to vote yes on the specification.  Now I am going
to
abstain.

I gather that the very existence of this technology is what IBM claims and
there
is nothing we can change in the specification to obviate IBMs claim -- they
claim the whole document even though they had a minor role in developing
it.

IBM is going to require anyone who uses CPPA to obtain a license?  This
makes
IBM the owner of CPPA!  Marty has assured us that the cost will be zero,
yet IBM
is not willing to make this assurance in writing.  Rest assured then, the
cost
will not always be zero.


Regards,

David Fischer
Drummond Group.

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin W Sachs [mailto:mwsachs@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 6:09 PM
To: ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ebxml-cppa] IBM patent disclosure



Regarding the question in the minutes of whether someone must apply for a
license for the IBM patents, I have checked on the answer.  The answer is
yes.  If a company believes that their CPPA implementation may be covered
by the IBM patents, the procedure is to apply to IBM for a license.  There
will be no fee for the license.

Regards,
Marty

********************************************************************************

*****

Martin W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
********************************************************************************

*****
----- Forwarded by Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM on 04/19/2002 07:03 PM -----


                      Peter Ogden
                      <pogden@cycloneco        To:       "ebXML-CPPA
(E-mail)"
<ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org>
                      mmerce.com>              cc:
                                               Subject:  [ebxml-cppa] CPPA
conference call minutes - 2002/04/19
                      04/19/2002 06:30
                      PM







Here are my notes  from today's conference call. Please advise if any
corrections are  needed.

Peter


**** Attachment CPPACallMinutes20020419.doc has been removed from this note
on 19 April 2002 by Martin W Sachs ****



----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>


----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>






----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Powered by eList eXpress LLC