RE: [wsn] Comments on Base Notif

["David A. Chappell" <chappell@sonicsoftware.com>]

Hi William,
I am doing a consistency review of WS-BrokeredNotification based on your
latest mods to WS-Topics.

- I noticed that WS-Topics has section 1.1 labeled as "Terminology", and
section 2 is "Terminology and Concepts".  In WS-BrokeredNotification,
section 1.1 is labeled "Notational Conventions" which avoids this
overlap.

- Should the "References" section in WS-Topics also refer to
WS-BrokeredNotification?  For that matter, WS-Topics does not appear to
have a "Relationship to other specifications" section. There are
references to notification brokers in WS-Topics but no formal
explanation of what one is, or where to go find out about one.  There is
such a section in WS-BrokeredNotification that you can draw from as a
starting point.

Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vambenepe, William N [mailto:vbp@hp.com] 
> Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 10:47 PM
> To: wsn@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [wsn] Comments on Base Notif
> 
> 
> Steve,
> 
> While producing the draft for WS-Topics I found a few small 
> problems in the current draft of WS-BaseNotif:
> 
> The "location" at the top of WSBN does not include the date 
> part in the URI.
> 
> In the last sentence of the "status" section, replace "WSRF" 
> with "WSN"
> 
> At the end of the first paragraph of "terminology", make a 
> proper reference to RFC2119.
> 
> In the reference section, you link to the white paper points 
> to the member-only site. You should use the public URL for 
> this document:
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/6661/WSNpubs
> ub-1-0.pdf
> 
> Since we are going to end up publishing pdf docs, you should 
> change your references to WSRL and WSRP to ending in .pdf
> 
> Regards,
> 
> William
> 
>