- From: Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 14:44:47 +0100
- To: <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>, <public-ws-chor-comments@w3.org>
Drew, Many thanks for the detailed review. We are incorporating them into the final draft. Cheers, Martin. >-----Original Message----- >From: public-ws-chor-comments-request@w3.org >[mailto:public-ws-chor-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of >Drew McDermott >Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 4:10 AM >To: public-ws-chor-comments@w3.org >Cc: drew.mcdermott@yale.edu >Subject: Tardy remarks on typos etc. > > > > >Here are some proposed corrections to the latest draft of the >Web Services Choreography Description Language (WS-CDL). >URL: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/chor/edcopies/cdl/cdl.html > >I've ordered them from "typos" to "stylistic infelicities." >The typos are likely to be uncontroversial, but the later >categories are probably too drastic to be useful at this >stage. I'm sorry this took me so long. > >The notation for changes is > >[/pre/current/=>/suggested/post/] > >which means that the occurrence of pre-current-post should be >changed to pre-suggested-post. If 'current' is empty, it >means that 'suggested' should be inserted. If 'suggested' is >empty, it means that 'current' should be deleted. Sometimes >this notation is generalized to multiple 'current-suggested' pairs: > >[/p1/c1/=>/s1/p2/c2/=>s2/.../pK/] > > >Typos > >In section 5.2, "Variables," and several other places, we have ><ul> lists inside <ul> lists, and apparently the stylesheets >to make them nest perspicuously are missing. > >[/Note that the Variable "OrderState" at the Buyer is a >different Variable /to/=>/from/ the "OrderState" at the Seller//=>/.//] > >[/also used in this Choreography, thus sharing the >Variable//=>/'/s information./] > >[/A perform activity MUST bind a free Variable defined in >a/=>/n/ performed Choreography/] > >[/The OPTIONAL attribute free, when set to "false" specifies >that /a/=>/the/ Variable is defined in this Choreography.] > >[/When this parameter is used, the /cureent/=>/current/ date >information/] > >[/A Variable defined in a Choreography is visible for use in >this Choreography and all its enclosed >Choreographies/up-to/=>/up to/ the point that the Variable is >/re-defined/=>/redefined/ as a/n/=>// non-free Variable, thus >forming a Choreography Visibility Horizon for this Variable./] > >[/The OPTIONAL complete attribute /allows/=>/makes it >possible/ to explicitly complete/] > >[/Alternatively, a Choreography in //=>/a /Successfully >Completed State/] > >[/an exception causing activity is performed that has a >/causeExeption/=>/causeException/ attribute value/] > >[/The actions/, including enclosed Choreographies that have >not completed, within this Choreography/=>/ within this >Choreography, including enclosed Choreographies that have not >completed, / are completed abnormally before/] > >[/If more than one Finalizer Block/s are/=>/ is/ defined for >the same Choreography/] > >[/Choreographies defined as requiring coordination must >be/ing/=>// bound to a Coordination protocol./] > >In the CreditDecider example, the third comment is identical >to the second; it should say "B" instead of "A" > > >Grammatical Irregularities > >There are places in the document that are simply not legal >English. I don't know how much that matters. Here is one-- > > >[/By introducing this abstraction, a Choreography definition >avoids referencing /directly the data types/=>/the data types >directly/, as defined within a WSDL document or an XML Schema >document.] > > >Commas Misplaced > >Many sections of the document seem to follow German >conventions for comma placement instead of English ones. For >instance, in English, restrictive relative clauses must not be >bounded by commas. It is almost never correct to separate >subject and predicate by a comma. > >[/A Choreography in an Enabled State/,/=>// completes >unsuccessfully/,/=>// when an Exception is caused in the Choreography/] > >[/The unsuccessfully completed Choreography/,/=>// enters the >Closed State/] > >[/A Choreography in an Enabled State/,/=>// completes >successfully when there are no more enabled activities within >its body./] > >[/A Choreography/,/=>// in a Successfully Completed >State/,/=>// enters the Closed State if no Finalizer Blocks >were specified in that Choreography./] > >[/A Choreography/,/=>// in a Successfully Completed State with >Finalizer Block(s) specified enters the Closed State/] > >[/When Choreography Coordination is not required, then the >Choreography is not bound to a Coordination protocol/,/=>// >and//=>/,/ since none of the above guarantees of agreement on >the outcome apply//=>/,/ any required coordination should/] > > >Stylistic Infelicities > >In this version all occurrences of <code> ...</code> are gone. > This makes the document much less clear. I suppose this is >some unfortunate W3C rule. > >[/The element roleType is used to identify/ the roleType of a >party, being the type of the target of an information >exchange, which is then used for statically determining where >and how to send or receive information to or into the party. >Each roleType is specified by the typeRef attribute of the >roleType element. =>/a party (named by the typeRef >attribute) that will be involved in an information exchange >using this channel./] > >[/If two identity elements are specified within the same or >different channelType elements, /that/=>/and they/ have the >same set of named tokens in the same order, then they are >considered to represent the same identity type./] > >[/This classification is used to indicate that this channel >instance is correlated to a previous channel instance identity, >and therefore//=> they are associated with/ the same >choreography instance./] > >It's unfortunate that the word "capturing" is in the name of >every kind of variable; since it's always there, it contains >no information. Wouldn't it be cleaner to have >"information-exchange variables," "state variables," etc.? > >In sect. 5.2, the paragraph starting "The value of Variables:" >is extremely hard to understand. It's followed by three >unordered lists, most of whose elements can't follow the >initial phrase. > >In the first paragraph of section 5.4, we have "Variables >contain values which MAY be populated or assigned...." What's >the difference between being populated and being assigned? > >[/when an Exception is caused in the Choreography and its >Exception Block/ is enabled, if present/=>/, if present, is enabled./] > >[/<li>/Other types of errors/=>/Some other kind of error >occurs/, such as Protocol Based Exchange failures,/] > >[/The channelVariable attribute specifies the /Channel >Variable containing information of a party, being the target >of the Interaction, which is used for determining where and >how to send and receive information to and into the >party./=>/channel to be used to communicate during the >interaction.//] (I _think_ this is the intended meaning; if >not, then I have no idea what it means.) > >Why are so many of the examples laid out as single, overlong lines? > > >
Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2005 13:44:15 UTC