Hi Doug,
I assume you meant RMS. ;-)
You were right about the security section; it was simply
adding spaces after periods.
-Steve
From: Doug Davis [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, Dec 15, 2005 16:07 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [ws-rx-editors]
Editorial changes (I swear!)
Steve,
I manually added your changes to WD08 I just
checked in. In the security section it appears you added spaces after
periods but OO's diff flagged the entire paragraph as being changed (see why I
don't trust it :-). Please verify that I didn't mess up.
I didn't do anything with the issues you
mentioned in the text of your note below - except I did add RMD to the glossary
since I had an AI for that.
-Doug
"Winkler, Steve"
<>
12/14/2005 01:06 AM
To
<>
cc
Subject
[ws-rx-editors]
Editorial changes (I swear!)
Hi Editors,
I went over the core spec in detail this weekend and
found several changes that I would assert are purely editorial. I produced
a cleaned up version, but would like to verify that you all agree that these
changes are editorial before I submit them. It will also be helpful for me
to have you review the proposed changes as this is my first attempt at using OO
for editorial purposes and I want to make sure it looks right before I upload
it. Attached is a red line diff between the new version of the spec.
Additionally, I noticed a few more substantial
editorial issues that I think we'll either need to discuss or raise to the TC.
I'll bring these up in a separate mail, but for example:
- RM Destination is defined in the glossary, but RM
Source is not.
- Element
definitions alternate between using RFC 2119 and not. E.g "This REQUIRED
element blah blah blah" followed by "This element, if present, blah blah blah"
instead of "This OPTIONAL element blah blah blah"
- "piggy backing" is mentioned several times, but
defined no where.
Etc. etc.
Cheers,
Steve
<<wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-07-steve-diff.pdf>>
[attachment "wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-07-steve-diff.pdf" deleted by Doug
Davis/Raleigh/IBM]
