Re: wsc-xit: Please review for publication.

On 2007-10-30 08:27:06 -0400, Mary Ellen Zurko wrote:

> Are the "(normative)"'s in titles accurate and comprehensive?
> They seem almost random. For example, I checked 6.1.1, which
> doesn't have one on the title, but seems like it should be. Sure
> enough, the first comment is that it is normative. It's confusing
> the way it is; make them all title comments or all comments after
> the title. 

I'll make them all comments after the title, as that's faster.

> "To complement the interaction and decision related parts of this
> specification, 8 Robustness addresses the question how the
> communication of context information needed to make decisions can
> be made more robust against attacks." grammar - Shouldn't that be
> "addresses the question of how..."?

Not sure; I defer to the native speaker.

> I have a number of personal quibbles with the status of the
> proposal, but those are not pertinent to this review. 

+1 to the quibbles :)

> Nice example formatting. 

Not my creation.

> In 7.3, "petname" is in a sense a forward reference to the
> definition in 7.4. It would be useful if there was some way to
> signal that. 

There's now a "Definition" around the second occurence, and the
first one is a link.

> > - Dropped in the Page Security Score.

> Ditto on the personal quibbles, but looks good in terms of going
> out for FPWD. 

+1 to both

-- 
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>

Received on Tuesday, 30 October 2007 13:05:50 UTC