W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-ws@w3.org > August 2004

RE: Members of the I18n WSTF

From: Addison Phillips [wM] <aphillips@webmethods.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:57:14 -0700
To: "A. Vine" <andrea.vine@Sun.COM>, "I18n WSTF" <public-i18n-ws@w3.org>
Message-ID: <PNEHIBAMBMLHDMJDDFLHAENEIHAA.aphillips@webmethods.com>

Reviewing it's on my list of things to do today. I'd be happy to send over
my signature if you prefer.

Others...?

Addison

Addison P. Phillips
Director, Globalization Architecture
webMethods | Delivering Global Business Visibility
http://www.webMethods.com
Chair, W3C Internationalization (I18N) Working Group
Chair, W3C-I18N-WG, Web Services Task Force
http://www.w3.org/International

Internationalization is an architecture.
It is not a feature.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-i18n-ws-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-i18n-ws-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of A. Vine
> Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 11:01 AM
> To: I18n WSTF
> Subject: Members of the I18n WSTF
>
>
>
> All,
> If you don't provide me any feedback, I will not send this note.  I have
> received none.  Not one.  There are a couple of holes that need to be
> filled in.  Most of the opinions expressed in this document are not
> mine, and I don't feel IN THE LEAST bit comfortable sending anything
> like this with out SOME KIND OF FEEDBACK.
> If someone else wants to send and sign their name to it, my feedback is
> already written in.
> Andrea
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: PLEASE REVIEW: Comments on SOAP Resource Rep Header doc
> Resent-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 00:07:15 +0000
> Resent-From: public-i18n-ws@w3.org
> Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 17:17:33 -0700
> From: A. Vine <andrea.vine@Sun.COM>
> To: I18n WSTF <public-i18n-ws@w3.org>
>
>
>
> {note to self: When this is ready to go, it should be sent to
> xmlp-comments@w3.org, copied to wstf, and say that all responses should
> copy wstf}
> {We were looking at the last call version, but we think this applies to
> the CR version.}
>
> The Internationalization Web Service Task Force (I18n WSTF) of the
> Internationalization Working Group (I18n WG) have reviewed the SOAP
> Resource Representation Header document and have the following questions
> and comments.
>
> Note that we have only reviewed this document, and not yet XOP nor MTOM,
> and some of the things discussed here may apply to them.
>
> 1. In what scenarios would this header be used?  In other words, what
> prompted the creation of this document?
>
> 2a. What happens when the resource is textual data in the form of type
> text/* or application/*+xml?  The charset handling should be discussed
> here (unless text/*, application/*+xml and other text types are
> explicitly forbidden).
>
> 2b. If text types are allowed, what does it mean to have and not have a
> charset attribute?
>
> 2c. If text types are allowed, is base64 still a requirement?  What
> happens when you have the SOAP document in one charset and the SOAP RRH
> with a text document in another charset?
>
> 3. {Need to change} Related to the above question, we recommend
> that either:
> 	a. text transport should be forbidden, or
> 	b. a recommendation against text transport this way should
> be included, or
> 	c. the base64 requirement should be relaxed.
>
> 4. URI is not defined in this document.  We recommend that the reference
>   be IRI, and be defined as {fill in the definition - Martin?}.
>
> 5. How are the URIs matched?  For example, are they case-sensitive?
>
> 6. To avoid requiring that all SOAP senders understand the HTTP caching
> mechanism, we recommend that all the data required by a processor that
> wants to act as a local cache needs to be carried along with the
> message. This includes the complete request/reply as well as the time
> the original HTTP request has been sent and the time the HTTP response
> has been received.
>
> 7. How are error conditions handled?  For example, what to do in the
> case of an HTTP 404?
>
> Below are some basic edits:
>
> 2.1 Introduction
> ----------------
>
> occurences => occurrences (2 places)
> several representation => several representations
>
>
> 2.2.1 rep:Representation element
> --------------------------------
>
> "One or more attribute information items amongst its [attributes]
> property as follows:"
> =>
> "One or more attribute information items amongst its [attributes]
> properties as follows:"
> (not clear as written, is it an "attributes property"?  If so, it can't
> be "amongst" a single thing.  Same comment for section 2.2.4)
>
> "One or more element information items in its [children] property in
> order as follows:"
> =>
> "One or more element information items in its [children] properties in
> order as follows:"
> (not clear as written, is it a "children property"?)
>
> "with a [namespace name] different than"
> =>
> "with a [namespace name] different from"
>
>
> 2.2.4 rep:Data element
> ----------------------
> (Same comments as in 2.2.1)
>
>
> 2.3 Extensibility of the Representation header block
> ----------------------------------------------------
> "several possible usage" => "several possible usages"
>
>
> 2.3.3 HTTP headers
> ------------------
> "... all SOAP senders understand HTTP caching mechanism"
>                                  ^the
>
>
> Regards,
> Andrea Vine
> W3C I18n WSTF
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the
> intelligent are full of doubt. -Bertrand Russell, philosopher,
> mathematician, author (1872-1970)
> [...shouldn't that end with "or maybe not?"]
Received on Monday, 30 August 2004 18:01:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:12:53 GMT