Re: Few more (significant) edits

SUMMARY: all actions specified by Glen committed, except text that he now
owes me.  Details are below for some actions.

On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 21:07:15 -0400
Glen Daniels <> wrote:
> * Missed this before - section 3.1.4 (the AD Module) should actually be
> promoted to section 3.2, with appropriate promoting of subsections.


> * 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:
>     <element name="isGoldClubMember"
>              type="xs:boolean"
>              ad:mustUnderstand="true"/>


> 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.

Write me text, please.  We need this as close to immediately as possible,
in order to include it in Last Call.

I already cut the last clause of the last sentence (mentioning soap
mustUnderstand) in the description.

> * "as defined in the Application Data feature" (what is currently sec
>, the words "Application Data feature" should link to section
> 3.2.

> * 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?

I can change the quote style.  Otherwise, bold or italic sounds like a
stylesheet issue, so bring up presentation issues with the Guardians of
Presentation Beauty (which is I-don't-know-who-only-it-isn't-me).

Amelia A. Lewis
Senior Architect
TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.

Received on Thursday, 29 July 2004 11:43:01 UTC