W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > October 2002

RE: comments on WS Desc Requirements draft of 29 April 2002

From: Jeffrey Schlimmer <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 09:02:32 -0700
Message-ID: <2E33960095B58E40A4D3345AB9F65EC109355C44@win-msg-01.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
To: "Amelia A Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>
Cc: "WS-Desc WG (Public)" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Good catch.

REQUIREMENT
R067 
The description language MUST have adequate points of extension in its
constructions. (From WG discussion. Last discussed 12 Apr 2002.)

COMMENT
R067 uses the term "points of extension", which should perhaps be
defined (I don't know what it means).

RECOMMENDATION
Reword: "The description language MUST allow for extension in
description language components, including at least message, port type,
binding, and service."

--Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Amelia A Lewis [mailto:alewis@tibco.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:32 AM
To: Jeffrey Schlimmer
Cc: WS-Desc WG (Public)
Subject: RE: comments on WS Desc Requirements draft of 29 April 2002

On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 11:22, Jeffrey Schlimmer wrote:

[snip]

> REQUIREMENT
> R067 
> The description language MUST have adequate points of extension in its
> constructions. (From WG discussion. Last discussed 12 Apr 2002.)
> 
> COMMENT
> R067 uses the term "points of extension", which should perhaps be
> defined (I don't know what it means).
> 
> RECOMMENDATION
> Reword: "The description language MUST allow for extension in 

Did something get eaten?  Rest of the sentence providing the rewording?

Amy!
-- 
Amelia A. Lewis
Architect, TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
alewis@tibco.com
Received on Thursday, 10 October 2002 12:03:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:21 GMT