W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlp-comments@w3.org > August 2002

RE: Typographical comments on "SOAP Version 1.2 Part 0: Primer"

From: Nilo Mitra (EUS) <Nilo.Mitra@am1.ericsson.se>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 14:09:24 -0500
Message-ID: <C358DED30DFED41192E100508BB3922701EE7B6A@eamrcnt716.exu.ericsson.se>
To: "'david_costanzo@yahoo.com'" <david_costanzo@yahoo.com>
Cc: "'xmlp-comments@w3.org'" <xmlp-comments@w3.org>
Thank you very much for your editorial comments. The proper place to report them is at xmlp-comments@w3.org, as stated in the  5th para of the status section of the document, but it is easy to miss, particularly if you are uninitiated.

However, I am forwarding these to that list. As you find more, please forward your comments - either technical or editorial - to xmlp-comments@w3.org. The comments and discussions are archived at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlp-comments/

Again, thanks. Your comments seem sensible will be addressed in the next version of the document.

-----Original Message-----
From: David Costanzo [mailto:david_costanzo@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 11:02 PM
To: nilo.mitra@ericsson.com
Subject: Typographical comments on "SOAP Version 1.2 Part 0: Primer"

Greeting Nilo,

I am slowly working my way through your excellent
document "SOAP Version 1.2 Part 0: Primer".  I have
only read up through section 2, but I have encountered
a some typographical errors.  I am new to w3.org, so I
don't know where to submit them or even if they are
appreciated.  If you have time, please direct me to a
resource where I can learn the proper procedure for
reporting non-technical issues such as mechanical
corrections that are probably not interesting to the
public mailing list.

The following comments apply to the document at:


This seems to be more recent the "editor's latest
draft".  However, many of the typos are in both

There are several inconsistent uses of the article "a"
and "an" when they precede acronyms or abbreviations
that begin with a vowel sounding letter.

* There are about ten instances of "a RPC" and three
instances of "an RPC".  To me, "an RPC" reads better.
* There are four instances of "a URI" and one instance
of "an URI".  To me, "a URI" reads better.
* There is one instance of "an URL".  To me, "a URL
reads better".

Section 2.2.2.  In the phrase "... where the purpose
appear to be ...", "appear" should be changed to

Section 2.2.2.  In the phrase "... the RPC response is
returned in the body element of a SOAP message, with
is modelled as a ...", "with" should be "which".

Section 2.2.2.  In the phrase "... which is an
enumeration with potential values of 'confirmed', and
'pending' ...", the comma just before "and" should be

Section 2.2.2.  In the phrase "... thereby making the
RPC inependent of any underlying transfer mechanism.",
the word "inependent" should be corrected to

Also, there were several places where a space was
missing after a hyper-linked word, joining it with the
subsequent word.  I did not note where these occurred,
 but I could keep an eye out for them as I continue to
read though the primer, if that would be helpful.

Best Regards,

David Costanzo

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
Received on Thursday, 1 August 2002 15:09:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:16:59 UTC