SCA-J Working Draft 04 Review Comments

Hi,

Having reviewed the changes in WD04 version of the SCA-J specifications, I have the following comments:

Editorial issues that should be fixed before we publish a CD

Document Footer:

Document version is wrong – it has WD03 but this is WD04

Date is wrong – title page says 15 August 2008 but footer says 27 May 2008-09-15

PDF Document:

Page numbers are wrong in the footer. It has Page 1 of 1, Page 2 of 2, etc. The Word document is correct.

Minor Editorial issues that don’t need to be fixed before we publish a CD

Page 7 – line 15

Extra space between end of sentence and full stop (.)

Page 17 – line 332

The code is coloured differently to the rest of the document. The keywords public and boolean should be purple

Actually – this is a general problem throughout the specification. Some code is coloured – other code is not.

Page 17 – line 359

Text is using the wrong font size (10 point.) The rest of the document uses 9 point font size. This is not visible in the PDF version of the specification but can be seen as the text being “more bold” in the Word version.

Page 27 – line 780

Remove extra space between ServiceReference<B> and extends

Page 27 – line 795

Supplied is spelt wrongly – in the document it is spelt suppied

Page 39 – line 1349

Section is missing example of using @Property with a Constructor. It has examples for the other two cases.

Page 40 – line 1408

Section is missing example of using @Reference with a Constructor. It has examples for the other two cases.

Page 60 – lines 2235 to 2260

QUESTIONS

I thought we agreed that we would update the style of the references from [1] to [RFC2119]? Or was this for the Assembly specification?

Thanks,

Mark

sca-j message