This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 961 - Informal vs Formal Definition
Summary: Informal vs Formal Definition
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: WS Choreography
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Last Call Comment: Confirmed Closed (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other other
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: --
Assignee: Martin Chapman
QA Contact: Martin Chapman
URL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/p...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-12-20 10:12 UTC by Martin Chapman
Modified: 2005-08-02 13:22 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description Martin Chapman 2004-12-20 10:12:13 UTC
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> 

From section 1.1 it is also not clear what is meant by "formal" versus
"informal" definition, which definition wins if the prose, the "formal"
notation and the "informal" notation contradict each other?
Comment 1 Martin Chapman 2005-02-14 20:16:24 UTC
From meeting on 11-jan-05
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-chor/2005Jan/att-0002/2005-01-
11_WS-Chor_Notes.txt:

Editorial - make a statement in section 1.1 that the schema  in the appendix 
takes priority.  Where the informal schema differs from the formal one then it 
is an error in the specification and please notify W3C.

Comment 2 Greg Ritzinger 2005-05-17 17:57:24 UTC
By adding the following text to the end of section 1.1 (a variation on
the suggested text which is why I am highlighting it here)
Where there is any discrepancy between the text of this specification, the
fragments of informal schema and the full formal schema in the appendix then
it is an error in the specification and please notify W3C.  While awaiting
resolution, the text takes priority over the formal schema in the appendix,
which takes priority over the informal schema fragments.
Comment 3 Martin Chapman 2005-07-14 14:21:20 UTC
Bjoern has been informed of the group's resolution to this issue [1].
changed to closed, and awaiting confirmation.

[1]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor-comments/2005Jul/0000.html
Comment 4 Martin Chapman 2005-08-02 13:22:01 UTC
Bjoern has confirmed he is happy with the resolution:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-chor-comments/2005Jul/0012.html