W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > July 2004

Few more (significant) edits

From: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 21:07:15 -0400
Message-ID: <80A43FC052CE3949A327527DCD5D6B275D8DF2@MAIL01.bedford.progress.com>
To: "Amelia A Lewis" <alewis@tibco.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

Just taking another scan through part 2, and noticed I missed some major
stuff (sorry!):

* Missed this before - section 3.1.4 (the AD Module) should actually be
promoted to section 3.2, with appropriate promoting of subsections.
It's a separate component, not a sub-component (although the module does
implement the feature, this should be indicated in the text for the
module, not by structural inclusion).

* We decided to accept the abstract ad:mustUnderstand attribute on the
schema instead of using the soap-specific one.  This change was never
actually made to the proposal!  This requires some surgery.  On the
bright side, it simplifies the schema for the example "isGoldClubMember"

    <element name="isGoldClubMember"

I can do this in a number of ways.  1) I can write you the text, 2) you
can hand me the XML and I'll edit and hand back to you, 3) you can sign
me up as a part 2 editor and I could edit it in CVS.  I'm OK with any of
those, let me know.

* "as defined in the Application Data feature" (what is currently sec, the words "Application Data feature" should link to section

* Other places in the document single-quote URIs.  I would suggest doing
the same for the feature/property URIs in section 3.  In fact, I think
it might look better if we actually  bolded or italicized these URIs -
is there any precedent for that?

Received on Tuesday, 27 July 2004 21:07:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:06:43 UTC