W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > December 2011

RE: new draft xml proc profiles doc

From: <vojtech.toman@emc.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 05:34:20 -0500
To: <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3799D0FD120AD940B731A37E36DAF3FE33FEF694ED@MX20A.corp.emc.com>
> I hope that is satisfactory,
> 
> Jim Fuller

Yes. Thanks, Jim.

Vojtech

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Fuller [mailto:jim@webcomposite.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 11:32 AM
> To: Toman, Vojtech
> Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: new draft xml proc profiles doc
> 
> Hello Vojtech,
> 
> I have made the following changes;
> 
> DONE (renamed to lowercase) 1. Section 2.3 contains "_C_lass Extended"
> while everywhere else the text uses "class" with lowercase "c".
> 
> DONE (corrected) 4. Typo in section 6: existance -> existence
> 
> DONE (removed 'about') 5. Typo in section 7: "not all of the profiles
> defined about can be combined" about -> above? (But maybe I just don't
> know the phrase.)
> 
> DONE (corrected link references) 6. URLs in the References section:
> The link to the latest version of the XProc specification is still
> wrong: http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/REC-xproc-20100309/. It should be:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/REC-xproc-20100511/
> Well, it is actually more complicated: look at the URL under *xml:id*.
> 
> and have left for us to discuss this afternoon.
> 
> FOR DISCUSSION 2. Regarding the perennial problems with "Entirely,
> ..." in sections
> 4.2.2/4.2.3: what about changing it to something like "Differs
> entirely, ..."?
> With the current text, I think it is quite difficult to see what
> "Entirely" actually refers to.
> 
> FOR DISCUSSION 3. Section 4.2.2: The text now uses the phrase:
> "Entirely, in a way
> parallel to the Element Information Items case above."
> I think we know what "parallel" means in this context, but isn't it
> still too vague?
>  Is using the analogy with the EII case really better than including
> the precise full text for each information item? The same applies to
> section 4.2.3.
> 
> I hope that is satisfactory,
> 
> Jim Fuller
Received on Thursday, 15 December 2011 10:37:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 15 December 2011 10:37:42 GMT