W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > December 2004

Re: My comments on CDL up to Section 2.4.2

From: Charlton Barreto <charlton_b@mac.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 10:50:48 -0800
Message-Id: <BE45F9D8-47B7-11D9-BDDC-000A95BD8B54@mac.com>
To: public-ws-chor@w3.org

Apologies, it seems like this never made it to the list....

> On 01/12/2004, at 16:07, Charlton Barreto wrote:
>
> As promised, here are my comments on the latest editor's draft of CDL 
> up to section 2.4.2.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -Charlton.
>
> Section 2.1, page 12, line 222
> "...within the same or across trust boundaries" should read "...within 
> or across trust boundaries".
>
> Section 2.1, page 12, line 237
> "Choreography Life-line - Choreography Life-line..." should read 
> "Choreography Life-line - The Choreography Life-line..."
>
> Section 2.1, page 12, line 243-245
> "Choreography Exception Block..." - this bullet and paragraph should 
> be aligned with the following "Choreography Finalizer Block..."
>
> Section 2.1, page 13, line 262
> "...and also the actual values of the exchanged information" should 
> read "...and the actual values of the exchanged information".
>
> Section 2.1, page 13, line 264
> "...record the semantic definitions of every single component in the 
> model" should read "...record the semantic definitions of every 
> component in the model".
>
> Section 2.2, page 13, line 267
> "Each definition is a  named..." should read "Each definition is a 
> named...".
>
> Section 2.3.4, page 18, paragraph 12, line 513-517
> "The optional attribute action is used to restrict the type of 
> information exchange that can be performed when using a Channel of 
> this Channel Type. The type of information exchange performed could 
> either be a request-respond exchange, a request exchange, or a respond 
> exchange. The default for this attribute is set to "request-respond".
>
> The request-respond exchange apparently corresponds to the WSDL 
> request-respond, or the in-out MEP in WSDL 2.0. The request exchange 
> apparently corresponds to the WSDL one-way, or the in-only MEP in WSDL 
> 2.0.
>
> If these assumptions are correct, then the respond exchange would 
> correspond to the WSDL notification, or the out-only MEP in WSDL 2.0. 
> As such, we are implicitly specifying support for 
> notification/out-only.
>
> This suggests to me that we really do not have an issue with 
> supporting notification/out-only in CDL. What then is the remaining 
> objection, if any, to supporting notification/out-only in CDL?
>
> Section 2.3.4, page 19, paragraph 8, line 546
> "In addition the identity elements..." should read "In addition, the 
> identity elements...".
>
> Section 2.4.2, page 23, paragraph 4, line 709-712
> "The optional attribute "silent"..."
>
> Would it make more sense to move it before the description of free 
> (2.4.2, page 22, paragraph 11, 2nd from the bottom)?
Received on Monday, 6 December 2004 18:50:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:06 UTC