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

RE: XMLP Resolution of QA Issues 367, 368, 369

From: Kirill Gavrylyuk <kirillg@microsoft.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 14:08:17 -0800
Message-ID: <37DA476A2BC9F64C95379BF66BA2690206075727@red-msg-09.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "David Fallside" <fallside@us.ibm.com>
Cc: <xmlp-comments@w3.org>, <qa-chairs@w3.org>

Thank you David,
this looks good to me, addresses all of the concerns I had.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Fallside [mailto:fallside@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 5:15 PM
> To: Kirill Gavrylyuk
> Cc: xmlp-comments@w3.org; qa-chairs@w3.org
> Subject: XMLP Resolution of QA Issues 367, 368, 369
> 
> Kirill, the XMLP WG believes it has resolved issues 367. 368, 369 [2]
that
> were generated from the QA WG's LC comments [3].
> 
> Issue 367, we have introduced a Conformance section as requested, see
[1].
> Issue 368,  within the new conformance section:
> -- we describe what constitutes (the scope of) an implementation, see
also
> "SOAP node" in the glossary [4]
> -- we say when an implementation can say it conforms
> -- we clarify the requirements for implementing Parts 1 and 2
> Issue 369, covered under resolution of #368
> 
> If these resolutions are not to QA's satisfaction, please inform XMLP
WG
> asap.
> Regards,
> David Fallside
> on behalf of XMLP WG
> 
> [1]
http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part1.html#conformance
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues#x367  ....  #x369
> [3]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlp-comments/2002Jul/0104.html
> [4]
http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part1.html#terminology
> 
> ............................................
> David C. Fallside, IBM
> Ext Ph: 530.477.7169
> Int  Ph: 544.9665
> fallside@us.ibm.com
> 
> 
> 
Received on Sunday, 1 December 2002 17:08:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:42:28 GMT