RE: [ws-rx] List of Bob's NEW issues (really only six) well, ok seven

[Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>]

Comments on Bob's issues:

Apx C examples http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archives/200606/msg00217.html

These sample message flows are tied to figure
2 - do we really want to update that one too? I don't really care much
except it does make more work for the monkeys  :-)  

Sequence Expiry http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archives/200606/msg00216.html

Do we really need an entire new section for
this or can we just add a line of text to where Expires is used saying
something like:
        This
value indicates the time at which the Sequence SHOULD be terminated.  
Or just change sentences like:
        This
element, if present, of type xs:duration specifies the duration for the
offered Sequence.
To:
        This
element, if present, of type xs:duration specified the duration of time
until the Sequence SHOULD be terminated.

Rollover by RM Source http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archives/200606/msg00212.html

on 1) that an impl detail, nothing on the
wire from a spec perspective
on 2) an impl choice - it may not choose
to close/terminate the sequence at all
I suggest: Close w/no action

What does not receive mean? http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archives/200606/msg00200.html

Just editoral, I'm ok with it.

Can’t respond if Sequence not known http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archives/200606/msg00193.html

Editorial, not sure its needed since the
definition of UnknownSeq fault says its sent whenever we see an RM element
referring to a Seq we don't know about, so do we really need to say that
for each and every RM element?  Seems a bit noisy but I'm not going
to lay down in the road over it.  My preference would be to close
w/no action since I think the Fault text already covers this.

Terminate sequence, fault not specified http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archives/200606/msg00192.html

See previous issue comment - this is getting
a bit verbose.

Add detail and specificity to fault descriptions
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archives/200606/msg00190.html

I would like to see a specific proposal (actual
proposed text) before I can know for sure if I like the idea of this or
not.
 

thanks
-Doug