W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > April 2007

Latest updates

From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:30:27 -0400
Message-ID: <462FC873.4080505@tibco.com>
To: "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Attached is a revised version of the one-way MEP, per today's
conference.  I'll work with Yves to get it checked in tomorrow.  The
inevitable notes:

    * The is /not//is NOT issue went away since we replaced the entire
      paragraph it was in.
    * We now say "If the sender has a means of detecting successful or
      unsuccessful transmission, it SHOULD fault in a binding specific
      manner in the event that transmission failure is detected." in
      paragraph 2 of 2.2, and "Each node MAY independently signal a
      fault in the case of abnormal operation." in the last paragraph. 
      Presumably the sending node is included in that.  So MAY it or
      SHOULD it?  Or should we just ax the sentence in paragraph 2?
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2007 21:30:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:30 UTC