W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > March 2004

Other suggested editorial changes

From: David Booth <dbooth@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 01:19:55 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040306092027.023d3c60@localhost>
To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, Roberto Chinnici <Roberto.Chinnici@Sun.COM>, "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "Jeffrey Schlimmer" <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>,
Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org

The following are other editorial changes

1. Some text in 2.1.2 about the intent of the targetNamespace overlaps text 
in 2.1.1, and would be better merged into the same paragraph.
In particular, I suggest that we move the following text from 2.1.2:
[[
         The target namespace represents an unambiguous name for the
         intended semantics of the WSDL Infoset. The targetNamespace URI
         SHOULD point to a human or machine processable document that
         directly or indirectly defines the semantics of the WSDL
         Infoset.
]]
to merge it in with existing paragraph in the note of 2.1.1, which 
currently says:
[[
         The components directly defined within a single Definitions
        component are said to belong to the same <emph>target
        namespace</emph>. The target namespace therefore groups a set
        of related component definitions and provides a hint of the
        intended semantics of the components.
]]
such that the existing paragraph in 2.1.1 becomes:
[[
         The components directly defined within a single Definitions
        component are said to belong to the same <emph>target
        namespace</emph>. The target namespace therefore groups a set
        of related component definitions and represents an unambiguous
         name for the
         intended semantics of the components. The targetNamespace URI
         SHOULD point to a human or machine processable document that
         directly or indirectly defines the intended semantics of 
those  components.
]]

2. In section "2.2.1 The Interface Component":
s/set of messages/sequence of messages/g

3. We should clearly say that any paragraph marked "Note" is 
non-normative.  I suggest using the term "Non-normative Note" instead of 
just "Note" to mark each Note.

4. Sec 2.3.1.1.1:
s/map between a message and a signature/map between a message type and a 
signature/


-- 
David Booth
W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
Telephone: +1.617.253.1273
Received on Wednesday, 10 March 2004 01:20:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:30 GMT