What it appears they are doing, is patenting the schema for

their XML word doc format.

This is more or less like patenting the format for a programming language (say Java).

XML itself is a 'meta-language'. This meta language allows people to define dialect languages suited to a particular purpose. The 'blue print' for a dialect is a doc known as the 'DTD' or 'Schema' (in MS's Office 2003 they use Schemas - XML Schemas are *vastly* more powerful than the older DTD definition doc).

What MS may be up to ...
========================
At the same time Microsoft are saying they will openly 'publish' the format for their Office XML 'Word' & 'XL' Schemas, but they are also patenting them. This could mean a couple of things ...

1) They intend charging royalties to any org that attempts to provide a program that deploys this schema (say 'Open Office'), but can claim that they have openly published it. Their actions can be seen as not unlike when IBM attempted to sue clone PC makers who copied IBM's BIOS - that led to 'clean room' clones of the PC bios & IBM's eventually became irrelevant.

2) Microsoft are positioning themselves to again dominate, but this time in the burgeoning world of Web Services (UDDI/SOAP/WSDL), by patenting the XML schemas in Word & XL at a time when the world may be about to discover that these products are the easiest and most comprehensive tools for not technical people to use to create interactive transactions between computers.

Positioning Web Services as the glue for web based applications
==========================================================================
Below is an attempt to put some relevance to Web Services and why Microsoft appears determined to dominate the technology however it can.

I have coined a quote that I believe accurately sums 'XML/Web Services' up.
"XML/Web Services will be to data inter-communication (Web Applications), what shipping containers became to world trade".

Think about how different the world would be today if 'open standards' for containerization had not been invented & adopted as a common global standards for shipping goods from place to place.

Where I work, a group of us are planning a series of info sessions to other staff both IT & non-IT. My topic is Web Services and the ease with which current tools can generate, deploy and interact with them. One demo we plan is to show how XL 2003 can now do what took programmers weeks, by way of building client-server transactions by button clicks & requiring only business process skills, not programming skills.

I have developed a Web Service demo called 'EcomsOrdersWS' that is designed to do one core task relevant to our business. The service responds to 3 function calls ...
1) CallServer (server responds with a message "#0-Date/Time. Server ready")
2) GetStatus (Server responds with a collection of strings where each string is the status of an order submitted previously from the caller)
3) SendInNextOrder (The server expects a collection strings where each string is actually a line item in an order. For each succesful order received& saved, it responds with a string message "#1-Date/Time. Order received ok and logged". If the order was in error "#9-Data/Time. Order rejected. Reason= blah blah blah"). The client code in this demo, blocks until a status response is received & we have added code in the client to move rejected orders to a special directory for manual handling later.

(the above calls and interfaces could be much more complex in that each line item rather than just being one string, could be a sub clooection collection of integers, strings & order related objects).

We have been testing various developer tools to see how easily they can be used to generate or access Web Services. To test a tool we start up an application that contains a web server which is in turn used to deploy the demo web service. The web server is the target home for the *.wsdl doc (EcomsOrdersWS.wsdl) that publishes the demo Web Service interface. This could be placed in a 'UDDI' registry but we have no need for UDDI just yet so simply publish the wsdl as a web page (still trying to keep it simple).

Our tests to date with the following tools show

1) JBuilderX. 3 Mins. We were able to build a base 'client' application ready for deployment, that is able to call each of the 3 functions, in under 3 minutes.

(Normally one would then add extra business logic to do something with the WS replies or to marshall the input to the Web Service (read an order in from a disk file, & in our demo, pass it as a collection of strings to the code that then calls the Web Service SendInNextOrder function)).

The key point re tools ...
==========================
Point here is that all we did was invoke JBuilderX, tell it we wanted to build a Web Service, qualified that by selecting that we wanted to build a 'client' WS module, entered the URL that pointed to the doc EcomsOrdersWS.wsdl sitting on our web server, the tool downloaded the wsdl doc, analysed it then built all the code needed to invoke each funcion, then the tool asks if you want to test the functions. By selecting yes, it tries each function call & in the console window displays the response. All in under 3 mins.

2) With WebSphere App Dev 5.1 we can do the same demo in 4-5 mins (WASD is a 'heavier' tool & a bit slower to get rolling than JBuilderX).

3) With BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 we can do the demo in about 5-7 mins. (But BEA WLW generates 'proprietary' Java code that only works on BEA Web Logic servers. IBM & Borland's tools generate open generic code).

4) With Eclipse 2.2.1 (the free download) plus a free Web Services plug-in, we can do the same in 3 mins.

5) With Microsoft's Visual Studio .NET 2003, we can do the demo in 4-5 mins.

6) We haven't tried Oracle's Java developer tool yet but we expect it to take the same.

Which tool impresses the most ?
===============================
One of the most impressive tools of them all for its wealth of XML & Web Services documentation, help & ease-of-use has to be Microsoft's Visual Studio .NET. I am no MS fan, but neither can I ignore the work they have put into VS .NET. This tools is designed to allow front-ends to Web Services, to be built by people who are business process focussed & don't need any real programming skills. The programmers are needed to build the actual web service & its back-end support.

WHERE XL 2003 fits in ...
=========================
What I have not done yet but plan to do, is to also show how using XL 2003, we can also do all the above & the result will be an XL sheet that allows me to enter by hand, an order & by clicking a submit button, sends the order to the web service server.

The powerful aspect of doing the above demo using XL, from what I know of its functionality, is that it is the only one of the above tools that is target at ordinary people & not software developers.

That is the revolution Microsoft are persuing with Office 2003 and it is that capability they seem to be trying to protect with patents.

Cheers

Doug Marker

Post #137,560 by dmarker 1/24/04 8:15:28 PM 1/24/04 8:17:45 PM Reply	What it appears they are doing, is patenting the schema for their XML word doc format. This is more or less like patenting the format for a programming language (say Java). XML itself is a 'meta-language'. This meta language allows people to define dialect languages suited to a particular purpose. The 'blue print' for a dialect is a doc known as the 'DTD' or 'Schema' (in MS's Office 2003 they use Schemas - XML Schemas are vastly more powerful than the older DTD definition doc). What MS may be up to ... ======================== At the same time Microsoft are saying they will openly 'publish' the format for their Office XML 'Word' & 'XL' Schemas, but they are also patenting them. This could mean a couple of things ... 1) They intend charging royalties to any org that attempts to provide a program that deploys this schema (say 'Open Office'), but can claim that they have openly published it. Their actions can be seen as not unlike when IBM attempted to sue clone PC makers who copied IBM's BIOS - that led to 'clean room' clones of the PC bios & IBM's eventually became irrelevant. 2) Microsoft are positioning themselves to again dominate, but this time in the burgeoning world of Web Services (UDDI/SOAP/WSDL), by patenting the XML schemas in Word & XL at a time when the world may be about to discover that these products are the easiest and most comprehensive tools for not technical people to use to create interactive transactions between computers. Positioning Web Services as the glue for web based applications ========================================================================== Below is an attempt to put some relevance to Web Services and why Microsoft appears determined to dominate the technology however it can. I have coined a quote that I believe accurately sums 'XML/Web Services' up. "XML/Web Services will be to data inter-communication (Web Applications), what shipping containers became to world trade". Think about how different the world would be today if 'open standards' for containerization had not been invented & adopted as a common global standards for shipping goods from place to place. Where I work, a group of us are planning a series of info sessions to other staff both IT & non-IT. My topic is Web Services and the ease with which current tools can generate, deploy and interact with them. One demo we plan is to show how XL 2003 can now do what took programmers weeks, by way of building client-server transactions by button clicks & requiring only business process skills, not programming skills. I have developed a Web Service demo called 'EcomsOrdersWS' that is designed to do one core task relevant to our business. The service responds to 3 function calls ... 1) CallServer (server responds with a message "#0-Date/Time. Server ready") 2) GetStatus (Server responds with a collection of strings where each string is the status of an order submitted previously from the caller) 3) SendInNextOrder (The server expects a collection strings where each string is actually a line item in an order. For each succesful order received& saved, it responds with a string message "#1-Date/Time. Order received ok and logged". If the order was in error "#9-Data/Time. Order rejected. Reason= blah blah blah"). The client code in this demo, blocks until a status response is received & we have added code in the client to move rejected orders to a special directory for manual handling later. (the above calls and interfaces could be much more complex in that each line item rather than just being one string, could be a sub clooection collection of integers, strings & order related objects). We have been testing various developer tools to see how easily they can be used to generate or access Web Services. To test a tool we start up an application that contains a web server which is in turn used to deploy the demo web service. The web server is the target home for the *.wsdl doc (EcomsOrdersWS.wsdl) that publishes the demo Web Service interface. This could be placed in a 'UDDI' registry but we have no need for UDDI just yet so simply publish the wsdl as a web page (still trying to keep it simple). Our tests to date with the following tools show 1) JBuilderX. 3 Mins. We were able to build a base 'client' application ready for deployment, that is able to call each of the 3 functions, in under 3 minutes. (Normally one would then add extra business logic to do something with the WS replies or to marshall the input to the Web Service (read an order in from a disk file, & in our demo, pass it as a collection of strings to the code that then calls the Web Service SendInNextOrder function)). The key point re tools ... ========================== Point here is that all we did was invoke JBuilderX, tell it we wanted to build a Web Service, qualified that by selecting that we wanted to build a 'client' WS module, entered the URL that pointed to the doc EcomsOrdersWS.wsdl sitting on our web server, the tool downloaded the wsdl doc, analysed it then built all the code needed to invoke each funcion, then the tool asks if you want to test the functions. By selecting yes, it tries each function call & in the console window displays the response. All in under 3 mins. 2) With WebSphere App Dev 5.1 we can do the same demo in 4-5 mins (WASD is a 'heavier' tool & a bit slower to get rolling than JBuilderX). 3) With BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 we can do the demo in about 5-7 mins. (But BEA WLW generates 'proprietary' Java code that only works on BEA Web Logic servers. IBM & Borland's tools generate open generic code). 4) With Eclipse 2.2.1 (the free download) plus a free Web Services plug-in, we can do the same in 3 mins. 5) With Microsoft's Visual Studio .NET 2003, we can do the demo in 4-5 mins. 6) We haven't tried Oracle's Java developer tool yet but we expect it to take the same. Which tool impresses the most ? =============================== One of the most impressive tools of them all for its wealth of XML & Web Services documentation, help & ease-of-use has to be Microsoft's Visual Studio .NET. I am no MS fan, but neither can I ignore the work they have put into VS .NET. This tools is designed to allow front-ends to Web Services, to be built by people who are business process focussed & don't need any real programming skills. The programmers are needed to build the actual web service & its back-end support. WHERE XL 2003 fits in ... ========================= What I have not done yet but plan to do, is to also show how using XL 2003, we can also do all the above & the result will be an XL sheet that allows me to enter by hand, an order & by clicking a submit button, sends the order to the web service server. The powerful aspect of doing the above demo using XL, from what I know of its functionality, is that it is the only one of the above tools that is target at ordinary people & not software developers. That is the revolution Microsoft are persuing with Office 2003 and it is that capability they seem to be trying to protect with patents. Cheers Doug Marker Edited by dmarker Jan. 24, 2004, 08:17:45 PM EST Expand All History
Post #137,954 by dmarker 1/26/04 5:34:27 PM Reply	Update! - MS tool doen't seem to work with wsdl generated by some of the other tools. ALL the other tools were abe to read a test wsdl file I had created (it was split in two & the 1st file <import>s the 2nd half - allows splitting out the actual URL/port where the web service is deployed, from the function bindings, very useful for changing the url or port that a service is actually listening on) MS Visual Studio tool seems unable to handle the w3c defined <import> command. So, Visual studio is only able to read the wsdl doc when it is all held in a single wsdl file. Doug M
Post #138,123 by CRConrad 1/27/04 11:22:21 AM Reply	MS embreaking and extenuiating standards, film at 11. What, Doug, you have the fucking nerve to act surprised by this?!? Where the FUCK have you been for the last fifteen years?!? Always knew you were a closet M$-$hill, as your above paean to "XL" (Whateverthefuck that is; "Microsoft Excel"?) shows. [link\|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode\|Christian R. Conrad] (I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.) You know you're doing good work when you get flamed by an idiot. -- [link\|http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/35/34218.html\|Andrew Wittbrodt]
Post #138,454 by dmarker 1/28/04 9:59:43 PM Reply	Youch!!! No not surprised at MS. Call me what you like but praising their Web Svcs dev tool doesn't make one a $Mshill. That was uneccesary & uncalled for :-( Fact is - their VS dev tool offers the best guide & info re building Web Services. Simple fact!. Ans that doesn't make them any less assholes when it comes to throwing their weight around. Yesterday we added Oracle's free JDev tool to our test & it stands out as a another very good free dev tool that also does Web Svcs. It is easily on a par with JBuilderX but JBuilderX cost $1000s Anyway, happy new year & how about we start 2004 with less vitriol. I'm willing to treat you respectfully if you can reciprocate. Cheers Doug
Post #138,455 by boxley 1/28/04 10:02:21 PM Reply	taken a look a squeak? I am not a developer at all but find it fairly simple to muddle about in. I like the fact that I can code it on my mac at home, intel winders winders at work and deploy on solaris just by slinging image files about. thanx, bill same old crap, con artists ripping off fools. Ah, hell, Catholic Church it start off that way. They All do. Jesus probably had three walnut shells one pea, then he's dead and can't be questioned, Gabriel Dupre questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #138,468 by dmarker 1/28/04 11:59:07 PM Reply	I have a copy of Squeak on my work pc But cos I also have enterprise VisualAge Smalltalk, I can walk on water when it comes do doing magic in smalltalk :-) VAST is tops. My base demo was written in smalltalk. Soooo easy. Cheers Doug
Post #138,456 by deSitter 1/28/04 10:20:41 PM Reply	In defense of CRC His newly mobile kid has been shredding his low-hanging book collection, so he's been unusally grouchy. -drl
Post #138,485 by CRConrad 1/29/04 4:28:28 AM Reply	"Youch!!!" yourselfch. (new thread) Created as new thread #138484 titled [link\|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=138484\|"Youch!!!" yourselfch.] [link\|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode\|Christian R. Conrad] (I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.) You know you're doing good work when you get flamed by an idiot. -- [link\|http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/35/34218.html\|Andrew Wittbrodt]

Welcome to IWETHEY!