RE: Some editorial issues with the Metadata document

A significant enhancement to the comprehensibility of the section of text under consideration.
 
Tony Rogers
CA, Inc
Senior Architect, Development
tony.rogers@ca.com
co-chair UDDI TC at OASIS
co-chair WS-Desc WG at W3C

________________________________

From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org on behalf of David Illsley
Sent: Tue 09-Jan-07 4:27
To: David Hull
Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org; public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
Subject: Re: Some editorial issues with the Metadata document




>     * The NOTE in section 3.2.3 after the first paragraph that if both
>       anonymous and non anonymous responses are supported there should
>       be a separate alternative including only anonymous responses
>       consists of one long sentence with no punctuation making it fairly
>       hard to parse but also lending it a certain Joycean quality which
>       is to be commended.

I thank you for the commendation, I am rather proud ;-)

However, having been someone who has spend much time trying to parse such
sentences in other specs, I'd agree with a re-write. How about:

NOTE: If both AnonymousResponses and NonAnonymousResponses are supported,
and the intention is to allow either to be used, care should be taken to
ensure there are alternatives such that a subject which supports only one
will have a compatible policy [WS Policy 1.5 - Primer section 3.4]. There
should be at least an alternative which includes just AnonymousResponses
as a nested assertion and an alternative with just NonAnonymousResponses
as a nested assertion

David