RE: WS-Policy 1.5 Specs Editors Drafts for Sanity Check Review

Hi Maryann,

 

To make the editorial changes you mentioned below, is just changing the XML.
I usually generate the HTML to visually review my change (but that is
optional). This is like any other AI we do.

 

I am not sure if you were thinking about the generation of diffs etc. We
will do them after all the comments are in and we made all the associated
changes. 

 

Regards,

Prasad

 

  _____  

From: Maryann Hondo [mailto:mhondo@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 9:09 AM
To: Prasad Yendluri
Cc: public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org
Subject: RE: WS-Policy 1.5 Specs Editors Drafts for Sanity Check Review

 


I can if someone lays out the steps needed. 

It seems this is not as simple as a single change to the XML. 
So, if you or Felix could articulate the steps, or point me to a document
that contains them, 
then I can execute the steps. 

Maryann 




Prasad Yendluri <prasad.yendluri@webmethods.com> 

10/13/2006 10:17 AM 


To

Maryann Hondo/Austin/IBM@IBMUS 


cc

public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org 


Subject

RE: WS-Policy 1.5 Specs Editors Drafts for Sanity Check Review

 


 

 




Hi Maryann, 
  
I agree with your comments. Can I request you to make the changes? 
  
Thanks, 
  
Prasad 
  

 

  _____  


From: Maryann Hondo [mailto:mhondo@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:21 AM
To: Prasad Yendluri
Cc: public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org; public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org
Subject: Re: WS-Policy 1.5 Specs Editors Drafts for Sanity Check Review 
  

Prasad, 
Thanks for all your hard work on this. 
I've given both a quick pass and will print out and review over the weekend
with a more detailed reading, 
but here are two minor changes to the summary text to consider.... 
I think the phrased is "fleshed-out" but I would recommend replacing this
with "added text to". 
And for the security considerations section, why not just leave out the
material in "()"...I don't think it adds anything. 

I think simple, direct statements are the way to go for a summary. 

Maryann 


Prasad Yendluri <prasad.yendluri@webmethods.com> 
Sent by: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org 

10/12/2006 04:29 PM 

 


To

dorchard@bea.com, public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org 


cc

  


Subject

WS-Policy 1.5 Specs Editors Drafts for Sanity Check Review


  

 


  

 





Folks, 
 
We have all the work on the Attachment specification completed. 
 
Dave: I did the Appendix D (Changes since last WD) also, so that we can
start internal review of this document, 
while we await the last AI on the framework doc to be completed. 
 
1. The Editors Draft of the Attachment document is here:
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-attachment.htm
l>
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-attachment.html

2. The Corresponding diffs from last WD file is here:
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-attachment-dif
f20060927.html>
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-attachment-diff
20060927.html 
 
If you like, please also review the mostly complete Framework document (we
have just one AI pending), so that we can get head start on this document
also: 
 
3. The Editors Draft of the Framework document is here:
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.html
>
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.html 
4. The Corresponding diffs from last WD is here:
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework-diff
20060927.html>
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework-diff2
0060927.html 
 
Please review for sanity check to see if we are ready to send this out to
the WG. Just sanity check to spot obvious blunders: 
As an editor please feel free to make any updates you see needed (and let
the team know). 
 
If there are no major issues, I hope we can send these to the WG COB Monday?

 
Thanks. 
 
Prasad