W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > June 2001

Re: Editorial issues on latest SOAP 1.2 spec

From: Martin Gudgin <marting@develop.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 23:06:16 -0700
Message-ID: <011101c10062$2169a050$44f36f3f@greyarea>
To: "Marc J. Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>, "Paul Denning" <pauld@mitre.org>, "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <frystyk@microsoft.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: <www-archive@w3.org>, "David Fallside" <fallside@us.ibm.com>
see below

Gudge

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Denning" <pauld@mitre.org>
To: "Marc J. Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Cc: <w3c-xml-protocol-wg@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 9:09 AM
Subject: Re: Editorial issues on latest SOAP 1.2 spec


> At 10:35 AM 2001-06-28, you wrote:
> >4.4.2
> >
> >Text: "Each block has an attribute with a local name of qname. It has an
> >attribute whose name is "qname", and whose value is the QName of a
> >header which the faulting node failed to understand."
> >Action: Repetition, change to "Each block has an attribute with a local
> >name of "qname", and whose value is the QName of a header which the
> >faulting node failed to understand."
>
> I propose we change to "Each block has an attribute with a local
> name of "qname", and whose value is the QName of a header block which the
> faulting node failed to understand."
>
> Action:  added "block" after header

Done.

>
> Also, 1st paragraph of 4.4.2 should change to
> "When a SOAP node generates a MustUnderstand fault, it SHOULD provide, in
> the generated fault message, header blocks as described below which detail
> the qualified names (QNames, per the XML Schema Datatypes specification)
of
> the particular header block(s) which were not understood."
>
> Action:  change "entries" to "blocks" and changed "header(s)" to "header
> block(s)".

Was already like this in the version I downloaded.

>
> Note that we did not change "detail entry" to "detail block", which is
fine
> with me.
> I searched for "entries" and found some use of "entries" associated with
> the "detail" sub-element of "env:Fault" body block.
> Can we bold the word "detail" when used to refer to this sub-element?

I see where you're going but we don't highlight any other element names
right now...

Not Done.


>
> Other places where we should change "entries" to "blocks":
>
> -  Table of Content for section 2.3 (be consistent with section title
> within the document)
>    -- Recommend section 2.3 title be changed to "Targeting SOAP Header
Blocks"

Done. ( TOC now matches section title both use 'Blocks' instead of
'Entries' )

> -  section 2.2, "It is expected that SOAP header entries ..."

Could not find above text in section 2.2 ( or anywhere else for that
matter )

Not Done.
Received on Friday, 29 June 2001 02:11:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:13 GMT