- From: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 18:40:58 -0400
- To: ext Prasad Yendluri <prasad.yendluri@webmethods.com>
- Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, public-ws-policy-eds <public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org>
no problem, open discussion on this is fine. I'll respond on the WG thread. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Apr 17, 2007, at 5:50 PM, ext Prasad Yendluri wrote: > Hi, > > > > 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. > > > > Regards, > > Prasad > > > > From: Prasad Yendluri > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 2:07 PM > To: 'Frederick Hirsch'; public-ws-policy@w3.org > 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 > description. > > 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 one). > > > > “Assertion Authors should associate optional assertions with the > appropriate endpoint, > > 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 applicable > > elsewhere rather than scoping them strictly to optional assertions? > > > > Regards, > > Prasad > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-ws-policy-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Frederick Hirsch > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 8:20 AM > To: public-ws-policy@w3.org > 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 > > Nokia > > > > [1] <http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy- > > guidelines.html?rev=1.38&content-type=text/html;% > > 20charset=iso-8859-1#optional-policy-assertion> > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2007 22:41:09 UTC