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

RE: Some editorial tweaks

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:16:04 -0800
Message-ID: <68B95AA1648D1840AB0083CC63E57AD609803492@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>, "Noah Mendelson" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "W3C Public Archive" <www-archive@w3.org>, "Nilo Mitra" <EUSNILM@am1.ericsson.se>, "David Fallside" <fallside@us.ibm.com>


Status: All done except 9 which Marc has sent out mail for.

>> 4	Section 2.6
>> 
>> 	Bullet 3 should be reworded to be clearer and use 
>infoset terms. "The 
>> Value of Code" seems ambiguous in the current langauge.
>
>First time in each part expand with what it really means.

First time in part 1 says:

Note: Throughout this document, the term "Value of Code " is used as a
shorthand for "value of the Value child element information item of the
Code element information item" (see 5.4.1 SOAP Code Element).

>> 9.	Section 2.7.4
>> 
>> 	It would be nice to add a note saying that these 18 
>exceptions are 
>> based on a 'writer makes right' approach and that a canonicalization 
>> algorithm ( a reader-makes-right ) approach would obviate 
>the need for 
>> them.
>
>Marc to send out a note to the WG asking for guidance and also 
>regarding whether the sig stuff should go in appendix

pending

>> 13.	Section 5.1.1
>> 
>> 	For consistency the type information for the attribute 
>should come 
>> immediately after the infoset properties
>
>Just do it

done

>> 15.	Section 5.1.1
>> 
>> 	It is implied but not explicitly stated that nested 
>encodingstyle 
>> override ancestor declarations. For clarity, I think there should be 
>> some explicit statement.
>
>Do nothing

Ok

>> 16.	Section 5.2.1
>> 
>> 	The relay AII is missing from the list of AIIs allowed 
>on a header 
>> block.
>
>Just do it

done

>> 17.	Section 5.2.2, 5.2.3, 5.2.4
>> 
>> 	We use different language in 5.2.2 concerning 
>intermediaries dropping 
>> these attributes than we do in 5.2.3 and 5.2.4. We should be 
>> consistent
>
>Just do it

Now says: "If relaying the message, a SOAP intermediary MAY omit a SOAP
role attribute information item if its value is
"http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope/role/ultimateReceiver" (see 2.7
Relaying SOAP Messages)."

>> 18.	Section 5.2.2, 5.2.3, 5.2.4
>> 
>> 	Concerning what changes intermediaries make to these 
>attributes I 
>> think it would be good to reference 2.7.4
>
>Just do it

Section 5.2.2 already contained ref to 2.7 (not 2.7.4). All three
sections now refer to 2.7 

>> 19.	Section 5.4.2
>> 
>> 	The constraint on the xml:lang attribute values should 
>be in section 
>> 5.4.2.1
>
>Nope, the constraint is on the parent. Do nothing.

Ok

>> 20.	Section 5.4.2.1
>> 
>> 	For consistency the type information for the EII should come 
>> immediately after the infoset properties
>
>Just do it

done

>> 21.	Section 5.4.2.1
>> 
>> 	We need to add that the [prefix] property of the 
>xml:lang attribute 
>> MUST be 'xml'
>
>Just do it

Added: "Note that the definition in of the lang attribute information
item requires that the [prefix] is "xml" or any capitalization thereof
(see [XML 1.0], Language Identification)."

>> 22.	Section 5.4.3
>> 
>> 	For consistency the type information for the EII should come 
>> immediately after the infoset properties
>
>Just do it

done

>> 23.	Section 5.4.5.1
>> 
>> 	The language concerning allowable attribute should use 
>the same style 
>> as we use for header and body blocks
>
>Just do it

done

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com
Received on Monday, 9 December 2002 23:16:50 GMT

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