RE: More editorial tweaks

Marc and I went through the remaining of Gudge's issues for Part 2 and
here's what we think we (spec editors) need to do:

>8.	Section 4.2.2
>
>	The numbered bullets use the term 'terminal node', but 
>that term no longer exists in the data model. We should 
>rewrite in terms of nodes with a lexical value.

Pending Gudge's recovery

>9.	Section 4.4
>
>	The language in the numbered bullets doesn't seem 
>consistent with other language concerning infoset items

Add text to the first occurance of "Value of Code" as in part 1.

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen 
>Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 15:08
>To: Martin Gudgin; W3C Public Archive; Jean-Jacques Moreau; 
>Marc Hadley; Nilo Mitra; Noah Mendelson
>
>
>Overall status: all done except 8 and 9.
>
>>1.	Section 1
>>
>>	The language we use for bullet 4 doesn't match the other bullets
>
>Match is now slightly better 
>
>>2.	Section 2.1
>>
>>	"this, if any" should read "thus, if any"
>
>Already done
>
>>3.	Section 3.1.1
>>
>>	We should put a cross-ref to Part 1 at the end of 
>numbered bullet 2.
>
>done
>
>>4.	Section 3.1.6
>>
>>	"considered to be of unspecified size" should read 
>"considered to have 
>>a single dimension of unspecified size"
>
>done
>
>>5.	Section 3.1.7
>>
>>	For consistency we should say the type is enc:valueType
>
>done
>
>>6.	Section 4
>>
>>	We should drop "only" from "not limited only to the 
>SOAP HTTP Binding"
>
>done
>
>>7.	Section 4.2.2
>>
>>	First bullet should be removed ( left over text )
>
>Alredy done
>
>>8.	Section 4.2.2
>>
>>	The numbered bullets use the term 'terminal node', but 
>that term no 
>>longer exists in the data model. We should rewrite in terms of nodes 
>>with a lexical value.
>
>NOT DONE
>
>>9.	Section 4.4
>>
>>	The language in the numbered bullets doesn't seem 
>consistent with 
>>other language concerning infoset items
>
>NOT DONE
>
>>10.	Section 5.1.1
>>
>>	First bullet has an example which is a QName ( should be a URI )
>
>Already fixed (example removed)
>
>>11.	Section 5.1.2
>>
>>	Diagram. Should the cloud with "Net" in it read "Network"?
>
>I can live with "Net" but not a biggie
>
>Henrik