W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org > September 2005

editorial comments on WSDL 2 part 1 last call draft

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 19:36:01 +0100
To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org
Message-id: <1126031761.14101.76.camel@Kalb>

Hi all,

here are some (IMHO) editorial comments on WSDL2 part 1 2005 last call
draft (it's really nifty how both last calls fall on 3 Aug 8-) ):


1) section 6.1.1 on mandatory extensions talks about extensions,
features and properties being optional or mandatory. I believe all
mentions of properties should be dropped from this section as properties
cannot be made mandatory, AFAICS.


2) section 8 (Conformance) should have at least a short introductory
paragraph before 8.1 starts; and this paragraph could describe how
section 8 (Conformance) is different from 1.2 (Document Conformance).


3) MAY is IMHO overly capitalized in many places and should be
lowercased: 2.3.1 first capitalized MAY; 2.4.1 same; 2.4.1.1 same; last
in 2.9.1; first in 3.1; 3.1.2; 4.2.1; 7.1.

My rule of thumb is to capitalize MAY where a reader could reasonably
expect MUST NOT or SHOULD NOT, like "the property MAY be empty", but not
where the may is kinda obvious, like "XML Schema MAY be used [in WSDL]".

My reason for dropping the capitalization is to make it easier for the
reader - they won't need to stop and think about the significance of
this particular MAY (like "should I have expected otherwise for some
reason?")


4) 2.8.1.1 says "IRI MAY ... be associated with AT MOST one ..." - I
don't think we should use "MAY AT MOST" in the conformance sense here;
this should be rephrased to use the standard MAY/SHOULD/MUST and other
verbiage to describe the constraint.


Best regards,

Jacek Kopecky
Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2005 18:36:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:31 GMT