Re: [icom] Proofing comments

[Laura Dragan <laura.dragan@deri.org>]

Hi and a Happy New Year to all!

I created a page in the ICOM wiki, for the comments, to keep them centralized:
http://wiki.oasis-open.org/icom/DraftSpecComments

Patrick, I started adding the ones in your email as well, so that will be 
taken care of (soon).

Have a nice weekend!
Laura

On Wednesday 21 December 2011 16:09:32 Patrick Durusau wrote:
> Greetings!
> 
> Reading from back to front:
> 
> Page, line number, comment
> 
> 209, 7265, Empty section "B. Non-Normative Text"
> 
> 207, 7244, voice, revise - Suggest: lose ", but any which are consumed
> must conform to this standard." -Redundant. To be an ICOM object it has
> to conform to the standard. Implementations can consume non-ICOM objects
> so this isn't well-founded.
> 
> 
> 207, 7238, end line with colon ":"
> 
> 207, 7233, end line with colon ":"
> 
> 207, 7229-7230 - remove: " , but any which are produced to be managed by
> an ICOM service provider, must conform to this standard. "
> - already defined as ICOM objects -
> 
> 207, 7214-7215 - Why examples of optional statements? Aren't these
> marked as optional in Section 4? In other words, why say "optional" here?
> 
> 207, 7211-7212 - Why examples of optional statements? Aren't these
> marked as optional in Section 3? In other words, why say "optional" here?
> 
> 207, 7208-7209 - wording, suggest: "An ICOM environment may include
> multiple service providers, each of which provides different subsets of
> extension modules."
> 
> 206, 7205 - wording, suggest: "for classes and super classes defined by
> such extension module.
> 
> 206, 7202, end line with colon ":"
> 
> 206, 7190, end line with colon ":"
> 
> 206, 7186, end line with colon ":"
> 
> 206, 7183, We say "by use case roles" here but never mention them in the
> following clauses? BTW, conformance is defined by this standard.
> 
> 206, 7177, "to be managed by" -> "managed by"
> 
> 206, 7170, "is defined in terms of the..." -> "is defined using..."
> 
> 205 - We do define "Multi," "Read Write," "True," "False" at some point.
> Yes?
> 
> 205, 7156,  icom_meta:property is a call back to line 2204 - 3.6.2 Property
> 
> Probably not worth the effort at this point but better hyperlinking in a
> future version between references and their definitions would be good.
> 
> 205, 7133, "sign on keys" -> "keys" ("sign on" may or may not describe
> activation of a role setting. It is just a key.)
> 
> 204, 7102, "is defined by" -> has the attribute values:
> 
> 204, 7100, "contains roles for a conference." -> defines role settings
> for conference participants."
> 
> 203, 7056, "is defined by" -> has the attribute values:
> 
> 203, 7047-7050, I would delete: "to express that" and leave "a
> conference session ended after the host left" and similar revisions on
> the following lines.
> 
> Sorry I did not pick this up in time to finish for this meeting. Will
> complete by the next ICOM meeting.
> 
> Hope everyone is having a great day!
> 
> Patrick
> 
> PS: Talk you to soon, breaking to eat lunch early! ;-)