Re: [sca-bindings] Editorial items - Issues

[Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>]

Simon points out that I should perhaps make sure that at least some of the editorial items raised below are resolved as part of the issue - so I'll have to come up with additional text....

However, some of the items are editorial in nature, and not related to the issues (57, 58, 59) in question.  Some comments below.

Simon Holdsworth wrote:

Eric,

I think these ought to be included in the proposed resolution, with the proposed renaming as well.

Regards, Simon

Simon Holdsworth
STSM, SCA Bindings Architect; Master Inventor; OASIS SCA Bindings TC Chair
MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley Park, Winchester SO21 2JN, UK
Tel +44-1962-815059 (Internal 245059) Fax +44-1962-816898
Internet - Simon_Holdsworth@uk.ibm.com

Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>

24/01/2009 01:49

To	OASIS Bindings <sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	[sca-bindings] Editorial items

While looking at the proposal I wrote up, I noticed these items:

binding.jms:

• Missing a normative reference [SCA-Assembly]
• Non-normative reference section is still TBD

The above are not related to the issues in question.

• binding.jms/@correlationScheme - values don't follow new convention
• binding.jms/destination/@create - values don't follow convention

Ah, these should be in the proposed resolution, if nobody objects to my adding them....

• @JMSDeliveryMode - these values are of course derived from elsewhere, so probably shouldn't follow the new conventions lay out here.  Or should they?

I didn't actually think there was an issue here, I was merely pointing it out.  If we change the convention for acronyms, so that acronyms are just treated like words, this would become "jmsDeliveryMode".  Perhaps that is an argument to keep the construction we've currently got.

binding.jca:

• Missing a normative reference [SCA-Assembly]
• Non-normative reference section is still TBD

Above are not related to the issues in question.

• Element names don't follow the naming conventions that we're supposed to be resolving with issues 57, 58, 59
• jca.outbound.connection/connection/@create, jca.inbound.connection/activationSpec/@create - values don't conform to our newly stated conventions.

Hmmm - I guess I should write up text for these too.  If you have objections, please let me know....

-Eric.