[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: NEW ISSUE: Editorial nits in Section 4 wrt using fault names in wsrm spec
Section 4 Paragraph 1 on Page 25 may read better with a different font or using bold with fault names. Further, there is a mix of the fault name vs. the fault code in the text. Fault names are indicated with using spaces with approprite section names, i.e. WSRM Required indicated by wsrm:WSRMRequired subcode.
The paragraph intermix this usage, i.e.
"CreateSequenceRefused is a possible fault reply for this operation". It should rather read "Create Fault Refused fault is a possible fault as a reply for this operation". I figured using the elements would be harder.
Similarly WSRMRequired is a fault generated … should read "WSRM Required"
Proposal:
A) Introduce spacing to match the fault names as introduced in section headings.
B) Alternatively we may consider to change the heading names to match the paragraph usage/
Regardless, using a different font for fault names may improve readability on printed paper.
I prefer A.
--umit
----------------------
Dr. Umit Yalcinalp
Architect
NetWeaver Industry Standards
SAP Labs, LLC
Email: umit.yalcinalp@sap.com Tel: (650) 320-3095
SDN: https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/weblogs?blog=/pub/u/36238
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]