Hi,
I just finished reviewing Alex's changes.
The spec is indeed much more readable, thanks Alex!
Just a few comments:
-
In
section 10.2, we have the order of standard elements inverted, it should be
<targets>…</targets><sources>…</sources>
instead of <sources>…</sources><targets>…</targets>.
(btw, this problems was already there and was not a result of Alex's
modifications) I can fix this the next time I edit the spec (just posting here
to get everyone's agreement).
-
We seem
to duplicate the (verbatim) definition of the exit activity in 5.2. and 10.10. It
seems that 5.2. generally has an initial explanation of some construct and
section 10 follows up with the exact definition. For the exit activity, we have
the same text in both places. Maybe we should just not mention exit at all in
5.2 (like we don't do for rethrow), or if we do mention, just keep the first
phrase instead of the complete definition to avoid future synchronization problems
between both texts.
Rgds,
alex
From: Mehta, Vinkesh (US
- Austin)
[mailto:]
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006
8:19 AM
To: Alex Yiu;
Cc: Alexandre Alves;
;
Subject: RE: [wsbpel-spec-edit]
spec restructuring effort
I have fixed the TOC and the formatting issue. I have
checked in the modified spec in CVS.
I am still reviewing Alex's latest changes.
-Vinky
From: Mehta,
Vinkesh (US - Austin)
Sent: Fri 1/27/2006 9:05 AM
To: Alex Yiu;
Cc: Alexandre Alves;
;
Subject: RE: [wsbpel-spec-edit]
spec restructuring effort
Thanks Alex.
- I will review your updates.
- Fix TOC
- Fix any other formatting issues
regards,
-Vinky
From: Alex Yiu
[mailto:]
Sent: Fri 1/27/2006 2:09 AM
To:
Cc: Alexandre Alves; Mehta,
Vinkesh (US - Austin); ;
; Alex Yiu
Subject: Re: [wsbpel-spec-edit]
spec restructuring effort
Hi all,
I have just checked in my changes into CVS.
Compared with the doc that that I sent out a couple of days ago, there are a
number of other minor additional changes:
spilting the references
section and update some of references (Ron's resolution)
adding more sub-section
numbers to abstract process section
apply "observable
behavior" more consistently to the Introduction section (instead of
using both "observable" and "visible" in a mixed
way)
Venky, I believe you are the next one to hold the pen to fix up TOC and other
format problems only in MS-Word 2003.
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex Yiu
This message
(including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a
specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not
the intended recipient, you should delete this message.
Any disclosure, copying, or
distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is
strictly prohibited. [v.E.1]
