RE: [Guidelines] Proposed update to section 4.5 (now 5.5), Design ating Optional Behaviors



My apologies, I did not intend to send my reply to the whole WG. 

Somehow I thought we were discussing this within just the editorial team.

Did not realize Frederick's note was sent to the WG list. 






From: Prasad Yendluri 
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 2:07 PM
To: 'Frederick Hirsch';
Subject: RE: [Guidelines] Proposed update to section 4.5 (now 5.5),
Designating Optional Behaviors


Hi Frederick,


Couple of quick comments.


1. Good practice (b) and (d) seem to have the same good practice

That is lines 28-29 and 62-63 are identical (ref: .pdf w/o diff). 


2. Some of these best practices could be applicable on a broader scope
rather than just 

"optional assertions". For example, the following best practice w/o optional
could be 

applicable to WSDL attachment (described in the section that follows this


"Assertion Authors should associate optional assertions with the appropriate

and right granularity to limit the degree to which optionality applies."


Is it worth rephrasing these to be more generic so that they can also be

elsewhere rather than scoping them strictly to optional assertions?





-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of Frederick Hirsch
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 8:20 AM
Cc: Frederick Hirsch
Subject: [Guidelines] Proposed update to section 4.5 (now 5.5), Designating
Optional Behaviors


I took an editors action item to revise section 4.5 of the Guidelines  

(designating optional behaviors) to reflect the approach taken in the  

Web architecture document, to re-structure as problem statement, best  

practices and then example. [1]


This resulted in a fairly extensive edit so I am sharing the revision  

with the WG before completing the edits. I added some best practices  

based on the original text.


Attached are plain and red-lines, with revised section numbers due to  

a subsequent change to the documents to add summary section of best  

practices at the beginning of the document. (Will probably need to  

add informative reference to MTOM assertion)


regards, Frederick


Frederick Hirsch



[1] < 





Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2007 21:50:21 UTC