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

yes

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Nokia


On Apr 18, 2007, at 12:52 PM, ext Paul Cotton wrote:

> Can you identify the new best practises and confirm they were not  
> in the original IBM/MSFT proposal?
>
> /paulc
>
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329
> mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com
>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-ws-policy-eds-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-policy- 
>> eds-
>> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Frederick Hirsch
>> Sent: April 18, 2007 12:25 PM
>> To: Asir Vedamuthu
>> Cc: Hirsch Frederick; public-ws-policy-eds
>> Subject: Re: [Guidelines] Proposed update to section 4.5 (now  
>> 5.5), Design
>> ating Optional Behaviors
>>
>>
>> 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 17:42:59 UTC