- From: Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:37:20 -0400
- To: "Glen Daniels" <gdaniels@macromedia.com>
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Overall I like this a lot. A couple of minor points: * "MUST clearly specify any known interactions with other extensions in terms of semantics or sequence." I think that should be : "MUST clearly specify any known interactions with or changes to the interpretation of the SOAP body. Furthermore, MUST clearly specify any known interactions with or changes to the interpretation of other SOAP features (whether or not those features are themselves modules)." The wording might need a bit of cleanup. Two points I am trying to make are (1) interactions with the body need to be covered and (2) "extension" is not a word we use in the rec... its features, I think, and we need to cover the features that are headers as well as those that are not. * * MAY indicate that the Module functions as an implementation of a SOAP Feature as defined in sec 3 of part 1. <<= Didn't you define a module as a feature? Do you mean one that follows the properties convention? If so, you should refer specifically to the section on property conventions. As I say, overall I like this a lot. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 IBM Corporation Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Thursday, 11 April 2002 16:53:38 UTC