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

Re: Other suggested editorial changes

From: David Booth <dbooth@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 12:11:57 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040317120850.02162ea8@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

I haven't seen any comments or action on these editorial suggestions.  Were 
they missed?

At 01:19 AM 3/10/2004 -0500, David Booth wrote:

>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

-- 
David Booth
W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
Telephone: +1.617.253.1273
Received on Wednesday, 17 March 2004 12:12:12 GMT

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