RE: My Ais for Sec 6.2/6.3 for 3989

Done. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Asir Vedamuthu [mailto:asirveda@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 3:02 PM
> To: David Orchard; public-ws-policy-eds
> Subject: RE: My Ais for Sec 6.2/6.3 for 3989
> 
> Looks good!
> 
> I suggest one minor change to make it super clear on who 
> should do what:
> 
> s/Use independent assertions for modeling multiple equivalent 
> behaviors./An assertion author should use independent 
> assertions for modeling multiple versions of a behavior./
> 
> >4. I couldn't think of an example where we could point to a 
> spec that 
> >changed it's policy subjects over time.
> 
> I am not aware of any.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Asir S Vedamuthu
> Microsoft Corporation
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> David Orchard
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 12:31 PM
> To: public-ws-policy-eds
> Subject: My Ais for Sec 6.2/6.3 for 3989
> 
> 
> I've checked in my proposals for 3989.  Let me know what 
> y'all think of it.  Some things of note:
> 
> 1. There didn't seem to be too much work to do this.  Hence, 
> I can take on another AI if somebody would like.
> 
> 2. There was an extra Best Practice about identify policy 
> subjects that seemed to be a dup of the very first bp.  So I 
> deleted it.
> 
> 3. One of the cool results of our movement to identified BP 
> is that I rewrote the sentence that just refered to section 
> #2 and said policy subjects should be identified to actually 
> point to the Best Practice.
> 
> 4. I couldn't think of an example where we could point to a 
> spec that changed it's policy subjects over time.  Can anybody help?
> 
> Cheers,
> Dave
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2007 18:09:02 UTC