RE: [ws-rx-editors] RE: [ws-rx] Editorial issues with WD 05

["Gilbert Pilz" <Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com>]

Let's fix 'em in wd06 and move on.

- g 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 4:39 AM
> To: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] RE: [ws-rx] Editorial issues with WD 05
> 
> Not a single one of these made it into the CD (other than the 
> status stuff that changed anyway). I don't think these should 
> have required an issue to get addressed in the CD. Perhaps 
> the multiple definition one, but the other ones are clear 
> editorial mistakes. A whole lot more were introduced between 
> this draft and the CD.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 3:18 PM
> To: Anish Karmarkar
> Cc: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] RE: [ws-rx] Editorial issues with WD 05
> 
> And another thing, receive is defined twice (and differently 
> each time) at lines 237 and 246.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 12:58 PM
> To: Anish Karmarkar
> Cc: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] RE: [ws-rx] Editorial issues with WD 05
> 
> Sorry, 4 below is more wrong than I thought. After line 3 and 
> before line 4 Document Identifier exists on the first page as 
> a title and with no line number. That should be after a page 
> break and line 4 should be
> wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-05 with 05 probably being whatever the next 
> revision number is. Also I guess this means line 60 should 
> say WD right?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 12:42 PM
> To: Anish Karmarkar
> Cc: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [ws-rx-editors] RE: [ws-rx] Editorial issues with WD 05
> 
> Here are some other editorial issues I've found by line number.
> 
> 4 Still identified as ED draft
> 60 Shouldn't that be CD?
> 184 extra space between accurately and determine
> 187 The capitalized incorrectly, should be the
> 633 Why does this line start with OPTIONAL? Any other 
> optional elements/attributes are called out in the immediate 
> line after they are declared. Furthermore I'm not sure this 
> is optional, it is an extensibility point and as such I don't 
> think anyone is supposed to barf if it is used. Earlier in 
> the spec it clearly says unknown extensions should be ignored.
> 1141, 1155, 1159, 1160 undefined namespace prefix of ws is 
> used, should be xs
> 
> Not sure if I'll get to the policy doc today or not, I'll try.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anish Karmarkar [mailto:Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 11:22 PM
> To: wsrx
> Subject: [ws-rx] Editorial issues with WD 05
> 
> All,
> 
> The editors would like to point out three ed issues against WSRM WD-05
> [1]:
> 
> 1) The pages numbers in the 'Table of Contents' aren't 
> correct. OO requires that all the indexes be regenerated once 
> changes are accepted, before generating the PDF. That was not 
> done before generating the PDF at [1].
> 
> 2) There was a editorial regression. Line 678 in [1] says:
> "to the element.Faults"
> This really should be:
> "to the element." and "Faults" should be on a new line and 
> formated as a
> 
> separate section (section 4). Because of this regression, 
> subsections that were previously subsections of section 4 are 
> now subsections of 3 instead.
> 
> 3) Robin Cover pointed out an editorial bug on line 124. 
> Given that our NS ends with a trailing '/' 
> (http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrm/200510/),
> line 124 should be:
> "reliable messaging namespace URI concatenated with the"
> instead of:
> "reliable messaging namespace URI concatenated with the "/" 
> character and the"
> 
> -Anish
> --
> 
> [1]
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.ph
> p/14785/ws
> rm-1.1-spec-wd-05.pdf
>