Re: [ws-rx-editors] wsrmp-1.1 wd02 updated to include resolutionfor issues 22, 24, 54, 73

[Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>]

Marc,

Thanks for looking at the doc and pointing out the missing issue.
I included the issues that were agreed to on WebConf between Umit, Gil 
and me (which did not include issue 55).

I have included issue 55 in the doc. Will upload in the next 2/3 minutes.

WRT the diffs, OO does not provide any options when exporting to PDF 
(except for compression related options) or when comparing docs :-(

-Anish
--

Marc Goodner wrote:
> It looks like you missed applying i055.
> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i055
> "Delete inactivity timeout."
> 
> Otherwise from a sanity check perspective this looks good. As you note
> below the line number flux and the fact that some of the proposals only
> use line numbers without text descriptions make this hard to review
> without laying hard copies next to each other. 
> 
> Also, I've noticed a lot of weirdness in the diffs. I don't know if
> these are being generated in OO or Acrobat, either way look for a
> setting to ignore formatting differences. It really makes a mess with so
> many lines marked deleted and new that are exactly the same.
> 
> Regards,
> Marc g
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anish Karmarkar [mailto:Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 6:24 PM
> To: WS-RX Editors
> Subject: [ws-rx-editors] wsrmp-1.1 wd02 updated to include resolution
> for issues 22, 24, 54, 73
> 
> I have updated the wsrmp spec to include the resolution for issues 22, 
> 24, 54, 73 as agreed today.
> 
> The link for the sxw file is:
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx-editors/download.php/
> 15709/wsrmp-1.1-spec-wd-02.sxw
> 
> The PDF is attached to this email. The diff with CD01 (PDF) is also 
> attached.
> 
> Please let me know if there is anything missing and I'll fix it. 
> Anything else needs to be done in WSRMP doc for the F2F?
> 
> Please note that for some of the issue resolutions the line numbers did 
> not match (with the referenced spec in the resolution email) or were 
> incorrect. But I searched for the right text and made the changes at the
> 
> right places. In addition, I had to make changes to the text to 
> incorporate the resolutions. Specifically, because we deleted backoff 
> and retransmission params, the example in the spec changed (which was 
> part of the resolution), which meant that the line numbers in the 
> example changed (which was not part of the resolution), which meant that
> 
> the line numbers referenced in the text changed (which was not part of 
> the resolution). I consider these changes to be completely editorial and
> 
> do not see the need to go back to the TC to get the TC blessing (the TC 
> will bless it in any case when the next CD is approved).
> 
> I did not upload the PDF as it may not be final (and I don't want to 
> version the PDF -- it is a 'Derived Object') and I'm not sure where to 
> upload it. Currently, the lastest ed drafts (wsrmp wd 02 and wsrm wd 07)
> 
> are under "Calendar Documents". Shouldn't we just create another 
> container for the latest docs?
> 
> Thx!
> 
> -Anish
> --