RE: Few more (significant) edits

I'm going to change this in the new text I send you.  No worries. :)

--G 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Amelia A Lewis
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 11:56 AM
> To: Asir Vedamuthu
> Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Few more (significant) edits
> 
> 
> Saw it, but didn't see a followup.  You can get *Glen* to 
> repurpose things, but all you can get *me* to do is cook^Wedit.
> 
> *laugh*
> 
> Raise an edtodo officially?  Consider this to be officially 
> creating an edtodo issue, or pair of issues: glen to change 
> the element; me to make required ed changes.
> 
> Amy!
> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 08:48:48 -0700
> Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com> wrote:
> 
> > Please see,
> >  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jul/0361.html
> > 
> > Asir
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] 
> > On Behalf Of Amelia A Lewis
> > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 11:43 AM
> > To: Glen Daniels
> > Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> > Subject: 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 <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com> wrote:
> > > * Missed this before - section 3.1.4 (the AD Module) 
> should actually 
> > > be promoted to section 3.2, with appropriate promoting of 
> subsections.
> > 
> > DONE.
> > 
> > > * 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"/>
> > 
> > DONE.
> > 
> > > 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 3.1.4.2), the words "Application Data feature" should link to 
> > > section 3.2.
> > 
> > DONE.
> >  
> > > * 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).
> > 
> > Amy!
> > --
> > Amelia A. Lewis
> > Senior Architect
> > TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
> > alewis@tibco.com
> 
> 
> -- 
> Amelia A. Lewis
> Senior Architect
> TIBCO/Extensibility, Inc.
> alewis@tibco.com
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 29 July 2004 11:59:25 UTC