W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-semann@w3.org > February 2007

John Miller's editorial comments addressed

From: Joel Farrell <joelf@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 11:14:12 -0500
To: SAWSDL public list <public-ws-semann@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF089F3077.A1BE41AE-ON85257279.0058A6C6-85257279.00593065@us.ibm.com>
These comments have been addressed in the editors' draft as noted below.
Also, I updated the sawsdl namespace in all places, since previously this
change was only made in the CR copy.

Regards,
Joel

> I just proofread the document
> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/sawsdl/spec/SAWSDL.htm
> and it reads very well.  I vote to request transition to Candidate
> Recommendation.  I'll fill out the form tomorrow morning.
>
> Here are a few trivial things I found:
>
> 1. Table of Contents
> 4.1 Annotating XML Schema Documents with Model Reference
> 4.2 Annotating XSD with Schema Mapping
> consistency?

Fixed
>
> 2. I noticed that in the definition of concept, class is not listed.
> This is typically how a concept is represented in OWL.  I don't
> think classifier is the same as class.

Do we want to reopen the definition of a concept? I think we purposely
didn't include "class" but I don't recall why.
>
> 3. Near the end of section 1.4:
> "A loweringSchemaMapping is also attached to the OrderRequest element
> to point to a mapping, in this case an XML document, which shows how
> the elements within the OrderRequest can be mapped to semantic data
> in the model."
> Sounds like lifting to me.

Fixed
>
> 4. In section 3, my browser shows wsdl:interface, wsdl:operation and
> xs:element in an unusually small font.
>
Fixed
> 5. In section 3.1:
> "The modelReference in this example points to a category some concept
> "electronics" in some semantic model."
> grammar?

Fixed
>
> 6. In section 3.3,
> "This example identifies the "ItemUnavailable" concept in the referenced
> semantic model as a description of the fault "itemUnavailableFault.""
> Don't see itemUnavailableFault in the example.

Fixed
>
> 7. In section 4.1.2,
> "Here, the complexType as a whole has been annotated with a reference to
> the OrderRequest concept. OrderRequest describes the sequence of
"Quantity"
> and "ProductCode" elements that make up the complex type."
> The complex type has quantity and UPC.

Fixed
>
> 8.  In section 4.1.4,
> "An attribute can be annotated by including a modelReference on the
> xs:attribute
> element. If the quantity element in the example above where defined
> as an attribute"
> "where" -> "were"

Fixed
>
> 9. Near the end section 4.2, my browser shows xs:element, xs:complexType
and
> xs:simpleType in an unusually small font.

Fixed
>
> 10. In section 5.1, "##any".  May be right, but it is only place in
> document with ##?

##any is correct.
>
> 11. Finally, the repetition of of the following might annoy some readers.
> "A non-empty modelReference on a top-level element declaration used in
WSDL
> is represented as {model reference} property of the Element
> Declaration component;
> the case of an empty modelReference or no modelReference at all is
represented
> with a Element Declaration component that does not have a {model
> reference} property."

Left as is, since we already discussed this repetition.
>
> Thanks,
> John
Received on Monday, 5 February 2007 16:15:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:58:46 UTC