Issue #14: Do not
concur.
- Explanation: While an improvement over the previous version,
I recommend that this wording be made clearer. Some
suggestions:
(1) Define what is meant by "reference model terms", since
this is the first time that this usage of the word "terms" is encountered in the
spec. I understand that this refers to SOA-RM terminology (such as "Discovery"),
but that may not be obvious to the reader,
(2) "to map between the SOA": Do we mean "to map between the
service"? (since it is not clear *what* SOA we mean here) - meaning the service
whose interface we reference on line 335
(3) "local service terms" - what is a "local service"? Do we
mean services that are service "consumers", in which case we would map between
their semantics and the semantics of an invoked service?
(4) It may help to provide more concrete details on what is
meant by "mapping" here, perhaps with a simple
example.
Issue #15: Do not
concur.
- Explanation: I concur with the updated description of
"Assumptions" (lines 294-296), but still believe that the example is too
esoteric. In order for the reader to gain a good sense of what is meant by
"assumptions" here, they need to understand what is meant by a solution
"assuming a compressible or incompressible flow". Frankly, who are we
trying to impress here? Why should we burden the reader with a knowledge of
fluid dynamics? To make it worse, we then state that "It
is not necessary here to comprehend the details of this example" - then why
provide such an example?
Issue #16: Still
open, per PD.
Issue #17: Still
open - requires further discussion at F2F.
Issue #18:
Concur.
Issue #21: Do not
concur.
- Explanation: The
original comment was regarding the need to make clearer what is meant by the
term "format". The 7B update simply added (beginning on line 328) a statement
that the particulars of such format are out-of-scope of the SOA-RM spec.
This does not satisfy the original comment, which is to make clearer what is
meant by the term "format".
Issue #23: Do not
concur.
- Explanation: The original text that was cited by the comment
is still in 7B, verbatim. The suggested PD (see modified wording at beginning of
Section 2.1) did not change the original comment.