W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > October 2003

Re: examples in spec?

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 19:51:59 +0600
Message-ID: <04de01c389b5$889fdd50$72545ecb@lankabook2>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>, <www-ws-desc-request@w3.org>

+1.

Is anyone against this? If not I'll consider this decided pending
formal ratification at a telecon and start adding examples.

Sanjiva.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Arthur Ryman" <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>; <www-ws-desc@w3.org>;
<www-ws-desc-request@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: examples in spec?


> I find illustrative examples very helpful in understanding specs. I think
> the spec should contain short examples for each construct. The spec should
> be self-contained, i.e. not require you to refer to the primer. The primer
> should contain an extended example and perhaps clarify subtle features.
>
> Arthur Ryman
>
>
>
>
> "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
> Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
> 10/03/2003 05:29 AM
>
>
>         To:     Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
>         cc:     www-ws-desc@w3.org
>         Subject:        Re: examples in spec?
>
>
>
>
> My recollection is that most examples would be in the primer, Part 1 & 3
> containing only a small number of introductory examples.
>
> JJ.
>
> Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>
> > I remember we discussed the idea of including some examples
> > (more likely example fragments) in the spec(s). What was the
> > final verdict?
> >
> > Sanjiva.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 3 October 2003 09:52:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:27 GMT