ws-rx message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Editorial comments on WSRM WD 10
- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- To: "Paul Cotton" <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 11:36:31 -0500
try: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx-editors/download.php/16958/wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-11.odt
Its in the editor's playarea.
thanks,
-Doug
"Paul Cotton"
<Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
03/02/2006 11:29 AM
|
To
| Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
|
cc
| <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>,
"Matthew Lovett" <MLOVETT@uk.ibm.com>
|
Subject
| RE: [ws-rx] Editorial comments
on WSRM WD 10 |
|
I just looked in the TC’s
document repository [1] and cannot find this Editor’s draft. Can
you supply a pointer?
/paulc
[1] http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/documents.php
Paul Cotton, Microsoft
Canada
17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329
mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com
From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: March 2, 2006 11:04 AM
To: Matthew Lovett
Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Editorial comments on WSRM WD 10
Matt, thanks - I've just checked in a new WD that has these fixed.
Please open a new issue for the 718&728 problem.
As for the schema/wsdl missing from the pdf I'll let someone else comment
on that :-)
thanks
-Doug
Matthew Lovett <MLOVETT@uk.ibm.com>
03/02/2006 10:32 AM
|
To
| ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| [ws-rx] Editorial comments
on WSRM WD 10 |
|
Hi all,
Here are some editorial nits that I noted down. They are not serious, but
it would be nice if they were folded into the next WD. (Certainly no need
to fix them for the CD we are about to create.) All line numbers apply
to wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-10.pdf
165: Wordsmith?
236: 2 full stops, Next sentance starts adruptly. Perhaps reword to "The
<wsrm:CreateSequence> element ..."
335: Some of the text is blue, it seems to be an embedded mailto: link!
338: Should there be an element wildcard as well as an attribute one? The
(non-normative) schema includes both.
368 & 381: Should we drop the quotes around 'close'?
369-370: Drop the 2 commas?
382: <wsrm:Final> is defined below not above
382: Drop the "Note, " preamble from the sentance, reword to
"Wherever possible the SequenceClosed Fault SHOULD be used in place
of the SequenceTerminated Fault to allow the RM Source to still receive
Acknowledgements."
431-433: Drop the 3 commas?
435: Drop the "Note, " preamble, reword to "Under normal
usage ..."
563: I don't think we can 'advertise the timing of acks in policy' any
more...
610: Reword "... when the Sequence is no longer receiving new message
for the specified sequence." to "... when the Sequence is closed."
659-660: "CreateSequenceRefused is a possible fault reply for this
operation." In the given context, there is no operation! Perhaps better
to say "CreateSequenceRefused is a possible fault reply for the CreateSequence
operation."
718 & 728: The latter constrains the language used for the faultstring
to be in english, the former does not. Which is correct?
863: Missing space.
923: The schema was included in a box in prior revisions. I preferred it
that way! The same comment applies to the wsdl file.
1173: The line numbers have gone wrong from here onwards.
Thanks
Matt
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]