Re: Long owed Description stack words

Hugo,

Please see below.

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
phone: +1 508 234 3624

Hugo Haas wrote on 10/28/2002 05:45:08 AM:

<snip/>
> I agree with Jean-Jacques. I will reiterate what I said about the
> mention of SOAP 1.1's submission: I don't think that we need to be
> historians of Web services here. We are describing the architecture.

Understood.

> 
> Moreover, I would be careful about using the word "standard": for
> example, W3C doesn't develop Recommendations. For this particular

??? 

> instance I would just drop "is the de facto standard for XML based
> service description" (the sentence looks weird to me grammatically,
> anyway). I would also drop "WSDL has been submitted to the W3C for
> standardization."

I've amended the sentence based on input from JJ. Okay now?

> 
> As a general rule, I would just try and avoid the word "standard".

Understood. 

> 
> BTW, Chris, that reminds me that the similar changes that I suggested
> about SOAP 1.1[1] were not integrated.
> 
> On the same topic, in the introduction, I would change:
> 
> |   The popular Web services standards; SOAP and WSDL, were originally
> |   developed outside the W3C but are now being refined and standardized
> |   within the W3C Web Services Activity. These de-facto standards have
> |   helped by creating and extensible messaging framework (SOAP) , and 
an
> |   interface definition language (WSDL) and data encoding conventions
> |   that facilitate mapping to back end systems.
> 
> into:
> 
>   The popular Web services technologies SOAP 1.1 and WSDL 1.1 were
>   originally developed outside the W3C but are now being used as the
>   basis for creating an extensible messaging framework (SOAP 1.2) and
>   an interface definition language (WSDL 1.2) as well as data encoding
>   conventions that facilitate mapping to back end systems, within the
>   W3C Web Services Activity.

I haven't taken verbatim, but have taken your suggested prose and
tweaked it slightly as the last bit: 

        within the W3C Web Services Activity.

was ambiguous (e.g. it appeared to imply that the data encoding 
conventions
facilitated mapping to back end systems belonging to the W3C...)


> 
> Regards,
> 
> Hugo
> 
>   1. 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-wsa-comments/2002Oct/0002.html
> -- 
> Hugo Haas - W3C
> mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/
>