- From: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 12:25:15 -0400
- To: ext Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Hirsch Frederick <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, public-ws-policy-eds <public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org>
added some best practices based on original text as noted by Paul on the WG call. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On Apr 18, 2007, at 11:53 AM, ext Asir Vedamuthu wrote: > Are you proposing any substantial changes to Section 5.5 (old 4.5)? > > Regards, > > Asir S Vedamuthu > Microsoft Corporation > > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy- > eds-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Frederick Hirsch > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 9:45 PM > To: Paul Cotton > Cc: Frederick Hirsch; ext Prasad Yendluri; public-ws-policy-eds > Subject: Re: [Guidelines] Proposed update to section 4.5 (now 5.5), > Design ating Optional Behaviors > > > We discussed this on the editors call and I think we agreed, in > keeping with the way we've resolved previous issues, that WG should > agree on changes that are more extensive. > > This is what we've been doing to date, even agreeing on detailed > wording in the WG. > > If we do not see any WG comments then we can go ahead and make these > changes without WG approval if you think that is best. > > regards, Frederick > > Frederick Hirsch > Nokia > > > On Apr 17, 2007, at 8:50 PM, ext Paul Cotton wrote: > >> Personally I think this would be better discussed by the Editors >> until you have a consolidated position to take back to the WG. In >> fact I thought that is what the Editors agreed to do. >> >> /paulc >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org [public-ws-policy-eds- >> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Frederick Hirsch >> [frederick.hirsch@nokia.com] >> Sent: April 17, 2007 3:40 PM >> To: ext Prasad Yendluri >> Cc: Frederick Hirsch; public-ws-policy-eds >> Subject: Re: [Guidelines] Proposed update to section 4.5 (now 5.5), >> Design ating Optional Behaviors >> >> 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 Wednesday, 18 April 2007 16:25:46 UTC