Did you catch the 2006 in the schema and wsdl files? You’re
right that those were in the zip. I was paying to much attention to file
extensions instead of the names. L
From: Doug Davis
[mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 6:28 PM
To: Marc Goodner
Cc: Gilbert Pilz; ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [ws-rx-editors] WD editorial comments/questions
Marc,
thanks
for the review. I've made all of the changes you suggested. As for
the issue with the links I'll have to look at that one later. OO was
showing them ok so I think it will require a bit more investigation. The
xml files should have been kept in-sync with the specs and should be part of
the zip file. I haven't the examples yet to make sure the xml is valid,
yet.
Editors,
I made
all of these edits into the next WD of each spec. I moved the current WDs
into the "Closed Editor Drafts" folder. I did not update the
main TC's Latest... docs or the zip file. I didn't want to confused
people by updating it in the middle of a review period.
thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com
|
Marc
Goodner <mgoodner@microsoft.com>
01/31/2007
06:43 PM
|
|
To
|
Doug
Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, Gilbert Pilz <gpilz@bea.com>
|
|
cc
|
"ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org"
<ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
|
Subject
|
[ws-rx-editors]
WD editorial comments/questions
|
|
I’m still
need to do a second pass, but here are the results from my first pass. Page
numbers are from the pdfs without diff lines.
All three
specs
· Footers
need the dates updated. I recommend scanning throughout for 2006 to update to
2007 (copyright, etc.)
· Link
issues from RM PDF, I stopped checking further after I discovered that these
don’t seem to be issues in the generated html. Is there a known issue with the
tool you are using to generate the pdf? I noticed similar issues in the other
specs. Even in the html the links to internal document bookmarks, e.g. section
headings or references are often either broken or not active.
o Spec location link
is not active
o Anish’s email is
not hyperlinked in the editor list, the others are
o None of the
references in the abstract and the other sections are links though they look
like links
o In status section
the IPR link is not active, 2nd link to TC page is not active
o TOC, Section
heading links are broken, Appendix entries are not links
RM
· Page
8, section 2.3 “in stead” should be “instead”
· Page
23, section 3.9, under Nack definition, the second to last sentence “within a
AcknowledgementRange” should be “within an AcknowledgementRange”
· Page
25, section 4, should WSRM Required be WSRMRequired? The section heading for
that fault has the space so its probably correct as it is.
· Page
29, section4.7 “can not” should be “cannot”
RM Policy
· No
other issues.
MakeConnection
· Page
10, section 3.2 2nd to last bullet “E.g. In” should be “E.g. in”
Questions
The
schema/wsdl has changed. Are the separate files ready?
Have the XML
examples in the specs been checked to make sure they are valid?