W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2002

RE: Editorial comments for Part 1, section 4-app A

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 14:30:55 -0800
Message-ID: <68B95AA1648D1840AB0083CC63E57AD6097C68EA@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>, "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "Nilo Mitra" <EUSNILM@am1.ericsson.se>
Cc: "Anish Karmarkar" <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>, "David Fallside" <fallside@us.ibm.com>, <www-archive@w3.org>


Marc and I went through the remaining of Henrik's issues for Part 1,
section 4-App A and here's what we think we (spec editors) need to do:

>General Comments
>----------------
>
>* We are inconsistent in the use of the term "SOAP message 
>infoset". Variants include
>
>- SOAP message infoset
>- SOAP Message Infoset
>- SOAP envelope infosets
>- SOAP XML Infoset
>- Envelope XML infosets 
>
>I would recommend: "SOAP message infoset"

Just do it

>* We are inconsistent in the use of the term "infoset" in 
>places not covered by the above. Variants include
>
>- Infoset
>- infoset
>- XML Infoset
>- XML infoset
>
>I would recommend: "XML infoset"

Just do it

>* I assume the new namespace will be
>
>	http://www.w3.org/2002/12/*

Update after we move the spec into new location

>Specific Comments
>-----------------
>
>* S5.2.1, bullet 4: Add bullet for "relay" attribute information item

Same as Gudge's point. Just do it.

>* S5.2.4, 3 (just after bullet list): xs:boolean should be 
>marked (italic)

Just do it 

>* S5.3 bullet list: Is it intentional that Body can't contain 
>any character II children even if header blocks and fault detail can?

Ask the WG. Should detail and body be the same? Ok that header block is
different. Henrik to send mail.

>* S5.3.1, bullet 1: Why do we have a namespace note on the 
>body child elements descendents but not on header block 
>descendents? Also, the former says "MAY" namespace qualify 
>whereas the latter says "SHOULD". Shouldn't we be consistent?

It's ok as is.

>* S5.4, P2 (just after bullet list): Change "only child of the 
>SOAP Body" with "only child of the SOAP Body element information item"

It should say only child element II of the body EII

>* 5.4.7.2, P1: Change "TheSupportedEnvelope" to "The SupportedEnvelope"

Just do it.

>Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
>mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com
Received on Monday, 9 December 2002 17:31:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:24 GMT