RE: [ws-rx] [NEW ISSUE] Consistent use of wsrm: in normative text

I can support this, makes sense. Hopefully we can just adopt this tomorrow. I would suggest that if we do adopt this proposal that any elements not in the RM namespace should have a namespace prefix on them whenever they are used. The prefix should of course be identified in the namespace table at the beginning of the spec.

From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 8:13 PM
To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ws-rx] [NEW ISSUE] Consistent use of wsrm: in normative text

Title: Consistent use of wsrm: in normative text

Justification: we're inconsistent in the spec(s) when it comes to referencing RM elements. Sometimes we say "wsrm:SequenceAck" and sometimes we just say "SequenceAck". We need to be consistent in whether or not we use "wsrm:" - and also the font :-)

Proposal:
[flip of coin...] Change all references to RM elements to just the element name w/o the "wsrm:" and use the fixed (courier?) font.
e.g. "....the SequenceAcknowledgement element...."

ws-rx message