- From: David Booth <dbooth@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 12:11:57 -0500
- To: "Sanjiva Weerawarana" <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>, Roberto Chinnici <Roberto.Chinnici@Sun.COM>, "Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "Jeffrey Schlimmer" <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>
- Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
I haven't seen any comments or action on these editorial suggestions. Were they missed? At 01:19 AM 3/10/2004 -0500, David Booth wrote: >The following are other editorial changes > >1. Some text in 2.1.2 about the intent of the targetNamespace overlaps >text in 2.1.1, and would be better merged into the same paragraph. >In particular, I suggest that we move the following text from 2.1.2: >[[ > The target namespace represents an unambiguous name for the > intended semantics of the WSDL Infoset. The targetNamespace URI > SHOULD point to a human or machine processable document that > directly or indirectly defines the semantics of the WSDL > Infoset. >]] >to merge it in with existing paragraph in the note of 2.1.1, which >currently says: >[[ > The components directly defined within a single Definitions > component are said to belong to the same <emph>target > namespace</emph>. The target namespace therefore groups a set > of related component definitions and provides a hint of the > intended semantics of the components. >]] >such that the existing paragraph in 2.1.1 becomes: >[[ > The components directly defined within a single Definitions > component are said to belong to the same <emph>target > namespace</emph>. The target namespace therefore groups a set > of related component definitions and represents an unambiguous > name for the > intended semantics of the components. The targetNamespace URI > SHOULD point to a human or machine processable document that > directly or indirectly defines the intended semantics of > those components. >]] > >2. In section "2.2.1 The Interface Component": >s/set of messages/sequence of messages/g > >3. We should clearly say that any paragraph marked "Note" is >non-normative. I suggest using the term "Non-normative Note" instead of >just "Note" to mark each Note. > >4. Sec 2.3.1.1.1: >s/map between a message and a signature/map between a message type and a >signature/ > > >-- >David Booth >W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard >Telephone: +1.617.253.1273 -- David Booth W3C Fellow / Hewlett-Packard Telephone: +1.617.253.1273
Received on Wednesday, 17 March 2004 12:12:12 UTC