RE: [wsdm] Comments on MUWS part 1

["Vambenepe, William N" <vbp@hp.com>]

See <wv></wv> below. 

Thanks,

William

-----Original Message-----
From: Murray, Bryan P. 
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 2:37 PM
To: wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [wsdm] Comments on MUWS part 1

Here are some additional comments on part 1:

- section 1, ~line 98: The text implies that all of the capabilities
defined in this part are required. I don't think this is true. This is
also repeated in the first para of section 5. Also, the
ManageabilityCharacteristics and CorrelatableProeprties capabilities do
not indicate that they are optional.

<wv>Fixed</wv>

- section 1, ~line 107: The document mentions SOAP 1.1 specifically. I
think the reference identifier (the part in []) should be just "SOAP". I
also think the reference at the end of the doc should be to SOAP 1.2.
Change this in MUWS part 2 also. If necessary, a general statement can
be made that there is no intention to restrict implementations to a
specific version of SOAP. MOWS refers to SOAP 1.2. 

<wv>I changed the key to just [SOAP] so it's easy for us to change the
reference, but I left the reference to SOAP 1.1. I just moved this
reference to non-normative so people can use it with SOAP 1.2 if they
chose to (nothing in our spec would break one way or the other).</wv>

- 3.6: I don't think the para beginning with "Within an enterprise" adds
anything and should be removed

<wv>I didn't remove it completely but I removed the most useless
part.</wv>

- 4.1.1, ~line 476: Its interesting that we never say what it means if
you have more than one ComponentAddress. Do all addresses have to refer
to the same resource? Can these addresses point to WSDL, metadata,
manageability endpoints, or functional endpoints? I don't know that we
should change anything here now, its just that a developer does not have
any guidance about what to put here.

<wv>I tried to explain better.</wv>