Doug, I think Gil
raised an issue on 659-660 below. http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-rx/200603/msg00008.html
From: Doug Davis
[mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006
8:04 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