W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > September 2006

FW: WSDL Part 2 Editorial work

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 11:04:43 -0700
Message-ID: <37D0366A39A9044286B2783EB4C3C4E803EA6823@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <www-archive@w3.org>



-----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr] 
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 6:21 AM
To: Jonathan Marsh
Cc: Arthur Ryman; Youenn Fablet
Subject: Re: WSDL Part 2 Editorial work

In the end, I've also performed CR44.

So we're now down to:
- CR26: Isn't the existing text clear enough?
- CR41: Isn't this covered already by the last paragraph of 6.5.2?
- CR57: It looks to me like an xs:string already. (It's "type" which is 
an xs:QName.)

Regarding CR44, I've added text which I feel will avoid everyone from 
redoing the reasonning from scratch. It at least captures my 
understanding of the issue.

JJ.

Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:
> I've now also DONE:
> - CR73 (I've further split #4 in two to keep uniformity).
> - CR74 (Part 1, not Part 2)
> - CR23 (Part 1)
> - CR42 (Part 1)
>
> This leaves only the following (Part 1 + Part 2) action item
outstanding:
> - CR44 (Part 2): Any volunteer?
>
> plus these three Part 2 action items which I think need no action:
> - CR26: Isn't the existing text clear enough?
> - CR41: Isn't this covered already by the last paragraph of 6.5.2?
> - CR57: It looks to me like an xs:string already. (It's "type" which 
> is an xs:QName.)
>
> This probably puts us in good shape. :-)
>
> JJ.
>
> Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:
>> Jonathan,
>>
>> As you'll have probably guessed from the logs already, I've 
>> implemented quite a few. Here is the exact list:
>>
>> CR24: DONE
>> CR25: DONE
>> CR26: Isn't the existing text clear enough?
>> CR27: DONE (this applied to subcodes, not codes, as mentionned 
>> erroneously in the resolution)
>> CR29: DONE
>> CR30: DONE
>> CR31: DONE
>> CR32: DONE
>> CR33: DONE
>> CR34: DONE (I performed an identical change to section 5. -same 
>> incriminating paragraph)
>> CR35: DONE
>> CR36: DONE
>> CR40: DONE
>> CR41: Isn't this covered already by the last paragraph of 6.5.2?
>> CR43: DONE
>> CR44: Any volunteer for this one?
>> CR57: It looks to me like an xs:string already. (It's "type" which is

>> an xs:QName.)
>> CR67: DONE
>> CR70: DONE (assuming it applied to RPCStyle-5014, not RPCStyle-5013)
>> CR73: I can do this one tomorrow, failing a volunteer
>> CR74: Isn't this a Part 1 issue instead?
>> CR75: DONE
>> CR76: DONE
>>
>> You probably didn't think a good night sleep would achieve that much!

>> ;-)
>>
>> Two issues came up whilst doing the editing:
>> - HTTPBinding-2600001 still used but no longer defined
>> - {safety} property still in component table, should now listed as 
>> {safe}
>>
>> Arthur would know how to fix them?
>>
>> I cc' Athur and Youenn just in case implementations need to be fixed.
>>
>> JJ.
>>
>> Jonathan Marsh wrote:
>>>
>>> We have a lot of outstanding editorial work [1] pending on Part 2. 
>>> Are you going to be able to devote some cycles to this in the next 
>>> few weeks or should I try to find some help for you? (For instance, 
>>> me.)
>>>
>>> I'm thinking we will want to republish the specs when we incorporate

>>> the issue resolutions we'll be working on for the next couple of
weeks.
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/actions_owner.html
>>>
>>> ** [ **Jonathan Marsh ** ][ ** jmarsh@microsoft.com 
>>> <mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com> ** ][ ** 
>>> http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com** ]**
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2006 18:06:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:00 GMT