Diane,
You are raising a different issue (that we do in fact need to resolve
w.r.t. the pictures) than what Danny pointed out.
His issue has got to do with entries in the text that refer to items in
the reference section not pointing directly at the entries in the
reference section.
For example, if you look at the hyperlink for the [XML Schema Part]
and [WSDL 1.1] references in the following spec text
"XSD
schemas and WSDL definitions are provided as
a formal definition of grammars [XML Schema Part 1] and [WSDL 1.1].",
they are pointing at
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/download.php/2470/wsbpel-specification-draft-01.html#xmlschema1
and
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/download.php/2470/wsbpel-specification-draft-01.html#WSDL
respectively, rather than directly at the local entries in the
References section.
Regards,
Prasad
Diane Jordan wrote:
There is a trick with pointing to
uri's
at the OASIS site that you want to have accessible by the public. As
I understand it, you need to find the uri from the public page for the
TC you are trying to reference - this means you have to make sure you
are
not logged on to the oasis site as a member when you find it -
otherwise
you will get the members link. I've added the oasis webmaster to
the cc list as there may be a better way to do this than I'm aware of.
Regards, Diane
IBM Emerging Internet Software Standards
drj@us.ibm.com
(919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile: 919-624-5123, Fax 845-491-5709
Prasad Yendluri wrote:
Danny van der Rijn wrote:
Point 2:
I wasn't even referring to the URIs in the references section. I
was referring to the references in the text. Search for [ and the
first one you will see is on page 7. That points to the OASIS site.
All of the others that I have spot-checked do, too. I'm not
sure if we have anchors in the references section, or where those are
actually
supposed to point to, but pointing to a password-protected OASIS site
is
not what was intended, I would imagine.
Yeah, I got you. That is what I meant below also. I
think
we need to create the anchors.
Action item 19
Point 1
Normative or non-normative? And thanks for catching the typo in the
URL.
I would think normative, as we just inserted text into
the spec that explicitly refers to this and the associated schema and
BP
1.1 compliance is a SHOULD requirement.
Action item 20
Prasad
Danny
Prasad Yendluri wrote:
Regarding, 2nd point below. I now see what you mean.
The
URIs for entry in the reference section are pointing to the OASIS site
and not the entries in the reference section. We need to fix that.
Prasad Yendluri wrote:
Danny,
Danny van der Rijn wrote:
Questions:
- Issue 195 adds a reference to the WS-I BP 1.1 Errata:
This XML Schema incorporates fixes for known errors, and
is the XML Schema selected by the WS-I BP 1.1 Errata (October 25,
2005).
Should this document (http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicProfile-1.0-errata.html)
be included in either the normative or non-normative references section?
I would think so. BTW it should be a BP 1.1 Errata
reference
(the above is a BP 1.0 Errata URL). We can include http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicProfile-1.1-errata.html
instead. Both are still Board Approval Drafts, though likely to go
final
soon.
- I notice that most of the references of the form
[WSDL
1.1] [...] have hyperlinks defined that point to the OASIS site instead
of just using #anchor syntax and referring to the same document. I'm
probably in over my head, but it seems strange. Wondering what I
should do for the [WSDL 1.1] reference I just added, as well as for a
possible
[WS-I BP 1.1 Errata] reference I may put in as a result of answers to
the
above question.
The WSDL 1.1 reference in Section G (References) is
pointing
to http://www.w3c.org/tr/wsdl
like so,
[WSDL 1.1] Web
Services Definition Language (WSDL) 1.1,
W3C Note
I think we want to add this in a similar fashion. Is that not what you
are referring to? I don't see a OASIS site pointer though..
I'm going to assume that my questions won't be
answered
by the time I'm done with my (other) changes, so I'll attempt to check
it in anyway. I may even succeed in checking in.
If more changes are needed, I'll create an action item to do so.
Thanks
Danny
Regards,
Prasad
|