W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy@w3.org > July 2006

RE: NEW ISSUE: Clarify the relation of overlapping definitions in the framework / in the attachement document

From: Daniel Roth <Daniel.Roth@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 17:58:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CACD2E414F77164CA4F324AF9A2094F301F58827@RED-MSG-70.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Felix Sasaki" <fsasaki@w3.org>, "Frederick Hirsch" <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
Cc: <public-ws-policy@w3.org>

+1

Daniel Roth

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-policy-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Felix Sasaki
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2006 6:05 PM
To: Frederick Hirsch
Cc: public-ws-policy@w3.org
Subject: Re: NEW ISSUE: Clarify the relation of overlapping definitions
in the framework / in the attachement document

Frederick Hirsch wrote:
> 
> My preference is to define the terms that are needed in the Framework
in
> the Framework document, then additional terms needed in Attachments in
> that document. Add note to Attachments that other terms associated
with
> Framework are defined in that document.

this seems to be close to b) , and I would be fine with it.

Felix

> 
> This was suggested at F2F, seems logical.
> 
> regards, Frederick
> 
> Frederick Hirsch
> Nokia
> 
> 
> On Jul 13, 2006, at 1:31 PM, ext Felix Sasaki wrote:
> 
>> Title - Clarify the relation of overlapping definitions in the
framework
>> / in the attachement document.
>>
>> Description -
>>
>> We should clarify the relation of overlapping definitions in the
>> framework / in the attachement document.
>>
>> Justification -
>>
>> Some terms are defined in both documents, see [1] and [2]. People who
>> want to normatively reference these terms should have only one
target.
>>
>>
>> Target -
>>
>> The sections at [1] and [2].
>>
>> Proposal -
>>
>> I see two possibilities:
>> a) Have the term definitions as they are, but adding to one of them a
>> statement like "the normative reference for this definition is at
xxx".
>> "xxx" points to the target definition in the other document.
>> b) Have the overlapping definitions only in one document, and
pointers
>> in the other.
>>
>> I have no preference for a) or b).
>>
>>
>> [1]
>>
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.h
tml#Terminology
>>
>> [2]
>>
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-attachement
..html#Glossary
>>
>>
>>
>> Felix
> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 22 July 2006 15:24:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:40 GMT