W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlp-comments@w3.org > May 2005

Issue 29rec is closed [Re: Suggested Minor Errata for "Resource Representation SOAP Header Block" http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PR-soap12-rep-20041116/ ]

From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 15:52:57 +0200 (MEST)
To: Simon Kissane <skissane@gmail.com>
cc: xmlp-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.63.0505091543170.20755@gnenaghyn.vaevn.se>
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Simon Kissane wrote:

Simon,
In section 1.1, you may find:

<<
All parts of this specification are normative, with the exception of 
examples and sections explicitly marked as "Non-Normative".
>>

So, examples are explicitely non-normative. As 4.3.3 is clearly labelled 
as being an example, it is by definition non-normative.
So the Working Group decided to close this issue with no actions taken, as 
the specification is clear enough on the status of section 4.3.3.

Please let the Working Group know if that resolution to the issue 29rec 
[1] is acceptable or not as soon as possible.
Regards,

[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-rec-issues.html#x29

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Simon Kissane <skissane@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 21:10:25 +1100
> Subject: Suggested Minor Errata for "Resource Representation SOAP
> Header Block" http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PR-soap12-rep-20041116/
> To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
>
>
> Hi,
>
> My interpretation of the "Resource Representation SOAP Header Block"
> is that section 4.3.3 is non-normative, which I believe is the
> interpretation everyone would agree with. However, the first time I
> read it, I formed the impression that the "HTTP resolver"
> functionality in it was some form of optional part of the
> specification. I might suggest, that to avoid any such impression
> being formed in the minds of a less than careful reader, that the
> section be moved to an appendix and clearly marked as "NON-NORMATIVE".
> (At first, I read the wording "Extension example:"  to mean, not that
> this section is non-normative, but that this part of the specification
> is an example of the power of the extensibility mechanisms in the
> specification.)
>
> Also, I could not find a public comment email address, or editors
> email addresses, for this specification, so I am reporting it here. Is
> this the right place? I would suggest that every recommendation should
> clearly identify in its introduction how errata or other such issues
> are to be raised.
>
> Cheers
> Simon Kissane
>

-- 
Yves Lafon - W3C
"Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras."
Received on Monday, 9 May 2005 13:53:27 GMT

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