Greetings all,
Since Adobe has not been participating in the IETF's Internet fax
working group...and has served primarily as a provider technology to
the working group since the spring of 98....I have chosen to let this
discussion mostly run its course. However, it seems some important
discussion points are drifting out of focus and I feel compelled to
re-state them.
1. It is important to distinguish between two issues (per the IAB
chair's presentation in London): interoperability and IP. It is my
understanding that the primary reason the WG in London chose to scale
things back was interoperability. I refer you to his briefing for
his rational, but I understand it to be based on general IETF
interoperability principles and specific IETF WG goals for TIFF FX
that resulted in the selection of TIFF as the basis for work. Adobe
is not the cause of this decision or action, although we support it.
Adobe's IP issue was specifically not addressed. The implementation
of the London WG decision has the side effect of mostly avoiding the
IP issue (deferred until the remaining functionality of TIFF FX is
investigated). It is my understanding the the IAB, IESG, and working
group chairs want us to evaluate this decision primarily on
interoperability grounds. My impression from the London WG meeting
is that they support the London decision.
2. If the Internet fax working group implements the recommendations
of the London meeting (focusing on the immediate progression of
mostly of S/F), this "interoperability choice" would mostly avoid the
IP issue. The Adobe IP issue remains significant for all other
profiles of TIFF FX, and the working group implicitly considers these
issues when it considers progression of those profiles.
3. It has been emphasized to me that the IETF as an organization
does not make statements nor take positions regarding the IP claims
of companies. However, it is certainly true that the
members/companies of the working group are making decisions regarding
what technologies to include in TIFF FX and are making decisions
regarding implementation of TIFF FX by their companies given (1) our
original license, (2) our communication with IETF editors, and (3)
our communication with the IESG and IAB. Adobe continues to indicate
that TIFF FX is outside the scope of our license grant. The IETF is
deferring a position on this to the membership/implementing companies
and whatever process they use to evaluate IP and licenses.
4. Finally, a bit of history (in response to an e-mail that asked
how we got here). Adobe provided a license to the IETF and ITU in
9/97 for the use of TIFF as the basis for the interchange of FAX data
on the Internet. The 3/98 draft of TIFF FX presumed the publication
of TIFF 7 with certain content which was never incorporated into
TIFF. TIFF FX was progressed despite this disconnect... and despite
repeated Adobe/IETF editor (Xerox) discussions that inclusion of
these features were not certain....and thus TIFF FX was left outside
the scope of the Adobe license. Other than cautioning the editors,
Adobe has not participated in the working group since the beginning
of 98. When the editors progressed the document despite objections,
we elevated objections to IETF management last December and the IAB
this Spring. The listed Adobe editor has not reviewed the document
since prior to the 3/98 publication and recently asked that his name
be removed from the latest version (it has yet to be removed by the
continuing editors). Early this year Adobe provided the IETF, at the
WG chairs request, a formal process by which any third party can
request content in the next version of TIFF. We have yet to receive
any requests via this procedure for us to incorporate the
presumed/missing content into TIFF.
Note that:
TIFF 6 is available on our web site.
Our license is available on the IETF and ITU web sites.
Our December 2000 e-mail should be available from the IETF.
Our process should be available from the WG chairs.
In close, I think the London proposal is a good way to move things
forward fast. While splitting the document has disadvantages, it
would allow rapid progression of the parts that are interoperable
with existing TIFF (but non-TIFF FX specific) readers. The
alternative leaves the IETF and anyone who wishes to implement TIFF
FX with a candidate TIFF FX specification that Adobe has identified
as being a use of TIFF that is outside the scope of the 9/97 license
grant to the IETF.
Adobe is committed to a timely review of any requests for changes to
TIFF and is committed to working with the IETF to ensure a TIFF
standard that is interoperable.
Regards,
Scott
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Sep 25 2001 - 19:34:05 EDT