This sounds good to me,
formal issue or not.
From: Doug Davis
[mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 4:51 PM
To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ws-rx] comments on WSRMP WD10-diff
Using
wsrmp-wd-10-diff.pdf:
Line 75 -
remove it - its redundant - we did this for ws-rm
Line 80 -
replaces "Section XXX" with "Section X.Y" like we did for
wsrm spec (2 of 'em in the doc)
remove all but
first occurences of [WS-RM], [WS-Policy], [WS-PolicyAttachments] - check for others
Line 102/103 -
s/be used for a Sequence/be used when sending messages/
Line 146 &
150 - s/must/MUST/
Line 155 -
s/RMD/RM Destination/
I think all of
these are minor things the editors can do w/o a formal TC issue but I'll hold
off until tomorrow in case someone objects to any of them.
thanks
-Doug