Re: [xml-dev] Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: [xml-dev] more pate nt fun

From
Paul Prescod <>
To
Elliotte Rusty Harold <>
Date
2003-01-18T17:22:11Z
ID
<>
Thread
Re: [xml-dev] Facts to Support RAND? was: Re: [xml-dev] more pate nt fun
Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:

> At 9:30 AM -0800 1/17/03, Tim Bray wrote:
>
> > The notion that you can make money by setting up a tollbooth on a
> > piece of Web infrastructure (and thereby driving out all
> > open-source/free offerings as a side-effect) is a radical proposal
> > without even an existence proof.
>
>
> Would either Flash or RealAudio qualify as an existence proof? If not,
> why not?

In my opinion, Flash serves as a demonstration of the limitations of 
proprietary formats. Less then 10% of the data on the Web the _should 
be_ vector graphics _are_ vector graphics and the same goes for 
animations. The concept of "animated GIF" is pretty bizarre and yet 
amazingly popular: because to date the alternative has been Flash with 
all of its proprietary binary badness. I'm expecting SVG to change that 
situation.

RealAudio is also not a good example because the audio-on-the-Web world 
is badly fragmented between various encoding forms. That would probably 
not happen if the W3C had blessed an RF real-time audio format.

  Paul Prescod