Re: [ws-tx] PR specifications

[ashok malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>]

In other TCs we have designated the PDF as the authoritative format.
The reason for this is that line numbers in Word documents can change,
depending on the version of Word you are using.

All the best, Ashok


Mark Little wrote:
> +1 for the source format.
>
> Mark.
>
>
> On 6 May 2008, at 17:42, Ian Robinson wrote:
>
>>
>> The recent ballot to approve the start of a public review of our 1.2 
>> specs concluded successfully.  We are required to submit HTML and PDF 
>> as well as editable source (in our case, Word doc) formats of the 
>> specs. We are also now required to nominate which one of these 
>> formats is authoritative with respect to the others. (This is 
>> different from the recent discussion and resolution on precedence or 
>> specification and wsdl/schema).
>>
>> So, as a TC, we need to agree whether to state that the source format 
>> (Word) or one of the generated (PDF or HTML) formats is the 
>> authoritative format.
>> Are there any objections to nominating the source format as the 
>> authoritative format?
>>
>> Please respond with any comments by the end of this week so we can 
>> proceed to PR.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ian Robinson
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> /
>> /
>>
>> /Unless stated otherwise above:
>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with 
>> number 741598.
>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire 
>> PO6 3AU/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> ----
> Mark Little
> mlittle@redhat.com <mailto:mlittle@redhat.com>
>
> JBoss, a Division of Red Hat
> Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod 
> Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom.
> Registered in UK and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 
> Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Charlie Peters (USA), Matt 
> Parsons (USA) and Brendan Lane (Ireland).
>