- From: Frederick Hirsch via cvs-syncmail <cvsmail@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 15:22:21 +0000
- To: public-ws-policy-eds@w3.org
Update of /sources/public/2006/ws/policy
In directory hutz:/tmp/cvs-serv24879
Modified Files:
ws-policy-guidelines.html ws-policy-guidelines.xml
Log Message:
Fixed Good Practice links in section 5.5
Index: ws-policy-guidelines.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-guidelines.html,v
retrieving revision 1.42
retrieving revision 1.43
diff -u -d -r1.42 -r1.43
--- ws-policy-guidelines.html 24 Apr 2007 01:14:36 -0000 1.42
+++ ws-policy-guidelines.html 24 Apr 2007 15:22:18 -0000 1.43
@@ -830,8 +830,8 @@
serialization). Thus, this optional behavior is self describing. For example, an
inbound message to a web service that requires MTOM must adhere to Optimized MIME
Serialization. By examining the message, the provider can determine whether the policy
- alternate that contains the MTOM assertion is being obeyed (Good Practice
- [<b><a href="#bp-indicate-optional-assertion-use">???</a></b>).
+ alternate that contains the MTOM assertion is being obeyed (
+ <a href="#bp-indicate-optional-assertion-use">Good Practice: Indicate use of an Optional Assertion</a>).
</p><p>
Note that if a MTOM assertion were only bound to an inbound message endpoint,
then it would not be clear whether the outbound message from the provider would
@@ -840,8 +840,7 @@
to avoid inappropriate assumptions by implementations. This is important for an
optional assertion where it may not be clear whether it is to apply in a message
exchange when optionally used in part of that exchange
- (Good Practice
- [<b><a href="#bp-entire-mep-for-optional">???</a></b>).
+ (<a href="#bp-entire-mep-for-optional">Good Practice: Consider entire message exchange pattern when specifying Assertions that may be optional</a>).
</p></div></div></div><div class="div2">
<h3><a name="levels-of-abstraction" id="levels-of-abstraction"></a>5.6 Levels of Abstraction in WSDL </h3><p>A behavior identified by a policy assertion applies to the
associated policy subject. If a policy assertion is to be used
Index: ws-policy-guidelines.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-guidelines.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.56
retrieving revision 1.57
diff -u -d -r1.56 -r1.57
--- ws-policy-guidelines.xml 24 Apr 2007 01:14:36 -0000 1.56
+++ ws-policy-guidelines.xml 24 Apr 2007 15:22:18 -0000 1.57
@@ -1016,8 +1016,8 @@
serialization). Thus, this optional behavior is self describing. For example, an
inbound message to a web service that requires MTOM must adhere to Optimized MIME
Serialization. By examining the message, the provider can determine whether the policy
- alternate that contains the MTOM assertion is being obeyed (Good Practice
- [<specref ref="bp-indicate-optional-assertion-use" />).
+ alternate that contains the MTOM assertion is being obeyed (
+ <loc href="#bp-indicate-optional-assertion-use">Good Practice: Indicate use of an Optional Assertion</loc>).
</p><p>
Note that if a MTOM assertion were only bound to an inbound message endpoint,
then it would not be clear whether the outbound message from the provider would
@@ -1026,8 +1026,7 @@
to avoid inappropriate assumptions by implementations. This is important for an
optional assertion where it may not be clear whether it is to apply in a message
exchange when optionally used in part of that exchange
- (Good Practice
- [<specref ref="bp-entire-mep-for-optional" />).
+ (<loc href="#bp-entire-mep-for-optional">Good Practice: Consider entire message exchange pattern when specifying Assertions that may be optional</loc>).
</p>
</div4>
</div3>
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2007 15:22:23 UTC