RE: Fuflillment of action item: language for circular includes

per 18 dec telecon,
this text is now incorporated in the draft
please review

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of Amelia A Lewis
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 11:09 AM
> To: David Booth
> Cc: WS Description List
> Subject: Re: Fuflillment of action item: language for circular
includes
> 
> 
> Good.  +1 to all suggestions here.
> On Thursday, December 11, 2003, at 10:52  AM, David Booth wrote:
> 
> > Hi Amy,
> >
> > Your proposed text looks reasonable.  I have a few editorial
> > suggestions though:
> >
> > At 01:01 PM 12/5/2003 -0500, Amelia A Lewis wrote:
> >> . . .
> >> Proposed text:
> >>
> >> Multiple inclusion of a single WSDL document MUST be resolved to a
> >
> > Change: "MUST be resolved" to "resolves".
> >
> >> single set of components.  Mutual, multiple, and circular includes
are
> >> explicitly permitted, and do not represent multiple redefinitions
of
> >> the
> >> same components.
> >
> > Insert: "Multiple inclusion of a single WSDL document has the same
> > meaning as including it only once."
> >
> >> Processors are encouraged to keep track of the source
> >> of component definitions, so that multiple, mutual, and circular
> >> includes do not require establishing identity
component-by-component.
> >
> > It might be good to move the following to the beginning of the
> > paragraph, to avoid the forward reference:
> >
> >> A
> >> mutual include is direct inclusion by one WSDL document of another
> >> WSDL
> >> document which includes the first.  A circular include achieves the
> >> same
> >> effect with greater indirection (WSDL A includes WSDL B includes
WSDL
> >> A,
> >> for instance).
> >
> > --
> > David Booth
> > W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard
> > Telephone: +1.617.253.1273
> >

Received on Tuesday, 6 January 2004 17:59:40 UTC