Ted, If that happens, don't you think that we would be obliged to object to their claims? IMO, such claims would be easily defeated on the same basis as most "look & feel" claims have been beaten in the past. In fact, I am not aware of issues with any sort of rights assertion relative to existing converters for MS (or Adobe) document formats. -- Eric --> -----Original Message----- --> From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] --> On Behalf Of Theodore Ts'o --> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 12:03 PM --> To: John C Klensin --> Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx --> Subject: Re: Alternative formats for IDs --> --> On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 02:59:34PM -0500, John C Klensin wrote: --> > (2) Development of a converter between the MS-XML output --> > of Word Pro 2003 and the XML input of RFC 2629bis so --> > that xml2rfc and its friends could take responsibility --> > for final formatting. Note that, if the converter were --> > two-way, you could edit happily in Word and others could --> > edit happily in XML and both could interwork. However, --> > as with the above, I think this solution would rapidly --> > deteriorate into uselessness unless there were a --> > commitment to produce new versions as new versions of --> > Office appeared -- at least until Microsoft stabilizes --> > and documents their XML formats. --> --> And even when Microsoft stablizes their XML formats, each person who --> wants to use the converter will have to apply individually to --> Microsoft for a patent license, for which Microsoft has apparently --> reserved the right to deny in the future for any reason. Sweet.... --> --> - Ted --> --> _______________________________________________ --> Ietf mailing list --> Ietf@xxxxxxxx --> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf --> _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf