[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Closing in on v3.0.1 Errata - RE: [uddi-spec] One last list of proofing items for 3.0.1
|
Thanks Tony for all this work. I've just
reviewed your proposed edits and the related mail threads. I've posted your docs
on Kavi at the following locations:
Here is what I propose:
a. Re edits to v3.0.1: Tom and I would
like to have a "Editors/Authors/anyone else concerned" telecon to walk through
your proposed edits and open issues above.
This will allow us to do a focused review of the changes without taken up the
TC's time. I'll add this proposal to the agenda so we may discuss it
further.
b. Re: your proposed alternative wording
to v3-to-v2 key conversion algorithm (10.1.1) I'll add an
agenda item to Tuesday's call to close on this. The last mail on this topic: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/uddi-spec/200309/msg00002.html
Luc
Clément From: Rogers, Tony [mailto:Tony.Rogers@ca.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 00:09 To: uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [uddi-spec] One last list of proofing items for 3.0.1 Section 10, first
para. The footnote numbered 34 contains "principal" - should be
"principle".
Section 11.2.1.3 -
why is the name "inquiry_v3" but the key "v3_inquiry"? It's inconsistent. The
same applies to all of the API tModels.
Section 11.4.7 and
11.4.8 - why are these the only two sort order find qualifiers with names
containing "sortorder" instead of "findqualifier"? This is
inconsistent.
Sections 11.4.19 and
11.4.20: should we add mention of the fact that these find qualifiers also
affect the list of serviceInfo elements returned by find_business? Perhaps the
additional sentence: "Note that the use of this find qualifier causes
find_business to remove any serviceInfo elements that do not satisfy the search
from the list of results." or something similar?
Section 11.4.21.4
last sentence of first para: "...using services projections..." should be
"...using service projections...".
Section 11.5 first
para contains: "Beyond the tModels defined here,
additional tModels are defined to help register within leading industry encoding
schemes and standard protocols." This is phrased very awkwardly, and could be
rephrased to be more easily read.
Section 11.5.1.2
last sentence "...have keys derived form..." should be "have keys derived
from...".
I've proofed up to,
but not including the appendices. Does someone else care to do
them?
NOT A PROBLEM: I
have checked all the derived keys in chapter 11 - they match the output of the
algorithm (that I got working thanks to John Colgrave).
Tony Rogers
tony.rogers@ca.com |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]