- From: Phil Adams <phil_adams@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:57:31 -0500
- To: Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>
- Cc: SOAP-JMS <public-soap-jms@w3.org>, public-soap-jms-request@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF5FD761DA.4CBE8CED-ON8625760F.007CAA0F-8625760F.007E1E22@us.ibm.com>
Hi Eric, During today's call I approved your proposed change as described below like everyone else did, but while I was making the changes, I realized that the new wording is slightly mis-leading. For example, the sentence ["The following example shows a textual representation of the JMS BytesMessage contents:"] specifically mentions BytesMessage, but in the example, there really is no claim that the example is in fact a BytesMessage, and the example (I think) also applies to a TextMessage as well. For this reason, I'm going to propose that we word the sentence like this: "The following example shows a textual representation of the JMS message body:" (or perhaps ...JMS message contents) and also, the example caption could read like this: "Example: Textual representation of the JMS message body for a SOAP 1.2 request with attachments" (or perhaps ....of the JMS message contents for a....) Also, on a slightly separate issue, we should probably also re-word the example before this (the one without attachments) so that both examples are consistent when we have a final decision on the actual wording. Comments? Phil __________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phil Adams (phil_adams@us.ibm.com) WebSphere Application Server Office: (512) 286-5041 (t/l 363) Web Services Development Cell: (512) 750-6599 IBM - Austin, TX From: Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com> To: SOAP-JMS <public-soap-jms@w3.org> Date: 08/10/2009 01:12 PM Subject: ACTION-91 - proposal to resolve ISSUE-8 Sent by: public-soap-jms-request@w3.org (FYI - I linked action 91 with ISSUE-8. It looks like the design is that any number of action items can be linked to an issue. To establish such a link, it appears you have to go to the *action*, not the issue). In any case, here's a proposal to resolve action 91. The proposal in issue 8 is somewhat imprecise. We currently have this text in section C.2: "The following represents a human readable version of the JMS message body:" followed by an example block. I propose that we reword that sentence to read: "The following example shows a textual representation of the JMS BytesMessage contents:" The text of the example header should also change to this: "Example: Textual representation of a JMS BytesMessage for SOAP 1.2 request with attachments" The contents of the example should be modified to *remove* the following lines from the beginning of the example: "MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Related;boundary=MIME_boundary; type="application/xop+xml"; start="<945414389.1092086011970>"; startinfo="application/soap+xml" " (Note that the blank line at the end of the above quote should also be removed.) References: * http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/8 * http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/actions/91 * http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/CR-soapjms-20090604/#soap-request-with-attachments
Received on Tuesday, 11 August 2009 22:58:28 UTC