RE: Please create links

["Mary McRae" <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>]

Hi Ashok,

  I'm not sure what "agreement" you are referring to. Here's the relevant links:

Brian Apperle's proposal to the Member Section Steering Committee regarding
establishing a consistent document URI across the member Technical Committees:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/opencsa-ms/email/archives/200710/ms
g00039.html 

That document was approved by the Steering Committee as a recommendation to the
TCs on 26 October 2007
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/opencsa-ms/download.php/25989/Open%
20CSA%20SC%2020071026%20Final.txt   

As TC Administrator, I also approved that document - however, only if each TC
follows the proposal. That is, creating a layer for the member section only
makes sense if each TC that is a member of the member section follows the same
protocol. If you disagree, this matter should be redirected to the OpenCSA
Liaison subcommittee.

Regards,

Mary

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ashok malhotra [mailto:ashok.malhotra@oracle.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 3:39 PM
> To: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
> Cc: 'David Booz'; 'Martin Chapman'
> Subject: Re: Please create links
> 
> Hi Mary:
> Revised documents are attached.  I have indicated inline how I have
> responded to your comments.
> Ashok
> 
> Mary McRae wrote:
> 
> >Hi Ashok,
> >
> >  Sorry - you're still naming a "latest version" link with CD - that is,
> >something stage-specific, rather than a generic that can be used over the
> life
> >of the spec. Here's some specific recommendations as well as other
> requisite
> >changes.
> >
> >
> [AM] Removed CD from the latest  version URLs
> 
> >1. Stage and Date are two separate lines:
> >Committee Draft 01
> >Date
> >
> [AM] Done
> 
> >(From what I can tell from the meeting minutes the document was approved
> as
> >a CD on 26 November? If not, please provide link to meeting minutes where
> CD was
> >approved by the TC)
> >
> >
> [AM] The CD was approved on the Nov 12 telcon.  I've attached the
> minutes for your convenience.  They are also posted on the homepage.
> 
> >2. Previous Version:
> >N/A (that is, please place "N/A" on the cover page)
> >
> >
> [AM] Done
> 
> >3. This Version:
> >(Martin, help me on this one)
> >I believe something was adopted that said sca TC documents would live in a
> >member-section directory --
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/open-csa/sca-policy/
> >The version number of the specification isn't shown anywhere - it needs to
> be
> >either in the path or in the filename:
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/open-csa/sca-policy/v1.1/{filename} (preferred
> and
> >recommended) or
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/open-csa/sca-policy/sca-policy-1.1-spec-CD-
> 01.doc
> >
> >
> [AM] No change as agreed between Martin and you.
> 
> >You *do* have the version in the filename, but for some reason you've used
> a
> >different filename in the "This version" URI. I still strongly encourage
> you to
> >create a version subdirectory, just in case the TC decides to create a
> follow-on
> >version in the future - it will be much easier to navigate.
> >
> >
> [AM] The file name and This Version URLs are now identical   I don't
> think the letters "spec" add any information but I've put them in.
> 
> >4. Latest Version:
> >These are intended to be stage-agnostic URIs, but you are using specific
> stage
> >info (CD-01). Something more like:
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/open-csa/sca-policy/{v1.1}/sca-policy-1.1-
> spec.doc
> >({optional})
> >
> >
> [AM] I've removed the CD from the URLs
> 
> >5. Latest Approved Version:
> >These are intended to provide access to the latest *approved* version as
> opposed
> >to a working draft or editor revision. You can either remove this category
> >altogether (since the library app is not yet in place and only approved
> >documents tend to get uploaded to the library) or use something like:
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/open-sca/sca-policy/{v1.1}/sca-policy-1.1-spec-
> approv
> >ed.doc
> >
> >
> [AM] Removed
> 
> >6. Declared namespaces:
> >Either list OASIS-specific namespaces or put "N/A". See below is not
> acceptable.
> >Note that the osoa namespace is not acceptable if its intent is to refer
> to this
> >specification rather than the 1.0 version; it must be an OASIS namespace
> of the
> >form:
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca/* (common namespace to be
> maintained
> >by SCA-Assembly)
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca-bpel/*
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca-policy/*
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca-assembly/*
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca-bindings/*
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca-c-cpp/*
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/opencsa/sca-j/*
> >
> >
> [AM] Done
> 
> >7. Notices
> >Last paragraph - SCA-Policy must be added where noted on the first line
> >
> [AM] Done ... I missed that earlier!
> 
> >.
> >
> >The good news is that once this is all settled, you shouldn't have to fuss
> with
> >it as the spec progresses.
> >
> >All the best,
> >
> >Mary
> >
> >
> >