Ditto, that’s
why I voted for it.
I’ve filed
everything I found now as well. Note I did not look at the schema, sample
messages or the state table in any detail. The CD candidate for PR will get
that level of review from me though.
From: Doug Davis
[mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006
12:57 PM
To: Patil,
Sanjay
Cc: Marc Goodner;
ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors]
Faults for what operation?
IMO - none yet.
-Doug
|
"Patil,
Sanjay" <sanjay.patil@sap.com>
03/01/2006 03:49 PM
|
|
To
|
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, "Marc
Goodner" <mgoodner@microsoft.com>
|
|
cc
|
<ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
|
Subject
|
RE: [ws-rx-editors] Faults for what
operation?
|
|
Are there any serious but editorial fixes that
must go in the CD III? I have scheduled an agenda item for tomorrow's call to
talk about this, but wanted to know if this issue is really applicable.
-- Sanjay
From: Doug
Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, Mar 01, 2006 12:46 PM
To: Marc Goodner
Cc: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [ws-rx-editors] Faults for what operation?
Fixed in latest WD.
-Doug
|
"Marc Goodner"
<mgoodner@microsoft.com>
03/01/2006 02:35 PM
|
|
To
|
<ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
|
[ws-rx-editors] Faults for what operation?
|
|
Finishing up my review of the core spec…
On line 659 it says “Faults for this operation…” Uhm, what
operation?
Looking at the diff version there used to be text here talking about sequence
creation operations that is gone. I have not gone back to see where the change
originated to see of this was an over optimistic delete or if this was a
deliberate part of a proposal for an issue or not. Does anyone happen to
remember?
Marc Goodner
Technical Diplomat
Microsoft Corporation
Tel: (425) 703-1903
Blog: http://spaces.msn.com/mrgoodner/