Next in thread →
Next in month →
Re: [obix] pre-meeting comments - versioning question
Notes interleaved.
Thanks!
bill
--
William Cox
Email:
Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
+1 862 485 3696 mobile
On 9/18/14 1:55 PM, Gemmill, Craig wrote:
Line
842 comment
This
was originally before all of the other subsections, so the
line about “subsequent subsections” actually intends to
point to the previous subsections. The intent was to
suggest that servers include whatever versioning information
they can (‘version’ or ‘retrievalDate’ as available) to aid
Clients in confirming the right edition.
I’d
propose to do one of the following:
a)
Update
the language to correctly point to sections 5.5.1 through
5.5.3,
needs to reference what it's pointing anyway; sections (with
internal references) are better than "above" and "below" and
"subsequent".
b)
Remove
it entirely, given that we are placing a requirement on the
way to identify the edition in 5.5.1,
Is the "server version" (really more like "server conformance
profile") really defined by the URIs of the various supported
namespaces/specs?
c)
Move
it to just before 5.5.2, so it applies to 5.5.2 and 5.5.3
(5.5.1 already requires its own behavior)
Slightly prefer
From:
[mailto:]
On Behalf Of William Cox
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 12:15 PM
To: Obix TC List
Subject: [obix] My pre-meeting comments, with
some post-meeting notes
Attached to this message as .rtf.
Thanks!
bill
--
William Cox
Email:
Web: http://www.CoxSoftwareArchitects.com
+1 862 485 3696 mobile
Next in thread →
Next in month →