- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:30:18 -0700
- To: <hugo@larve.net>
- Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Thanks for your comment, and apologizes for reporting our resolution so belatedly. The WS Description Working Group tracked this issue as a CR039 [1]. The Working Group agreed with the changes you made, this mail simply fulfills our response requirements. Unless you let us know otherwise by the end of September, we will assume you agree with the resolution of this issue. [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR039 -----Original Message----- From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Hugo Haas Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 9:40 AM To: www-ws-desc@w3.org Subject: Mentions of "error" and "fatal error" in Part 2 As per my action item: ? 2006-03-16: Hugo to check Part 2 for instances of the terminology "fatal error". I looked at part 2, and have replaced those instances by MUST and MUST NOT sentences. I did it directly in the draft as it was simpler. Here is the diff: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts.xml.diff?r1 =1.160&r2=1.161&f=h And the final result: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts. html?rev=1.132&content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8 Jonathan, I didn't find a CR issue associated to this. We probably should have one, and have the WG approve the changes. Regards, Hugo -- Hugo Haas - W3C mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/
Received on Wednesday, 30 August 2006 21:30:52 UTC