Re: Important for POC Registry Implementors: Bug Fixes in RegistryServices v0.8

[Nikola Stojanovic <nhomest1@twcny.rr.com>]

FYI,
TA has discussed the issue of naming guidelines in last 2 con calls. We
should have last meeting's (this week's) minutes posted to listserv soon,
but in the meantime you can look at:
http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-architecture/200009/doc00004.doc
section "Style guide convention".

BTW, in this particular case I support camelCase - ebXML and not
PascalCase - EbXML notation.

Regards,
Nikola

----- Original Message -----
From: "Farrukh Najmi" <Farrukh.Najmi@east.sun.com>
To: "ebXML poc" <ebxml-poc@lists.ebxml.org>
Cc: "ebxml repository" <ebxml-regrep@lists.ebxml.org>; "Burdett, David"
<david.burdett@commerceone.com>
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 10:07 AM
Subject: Important for POC Registry Implementors: Bug Fixes in Registry
Services v0.8



During POC  implementation of the following bugs were found in the RS
v0.8 spec:

ebXMLError => EbXMLError
--------------------------------
This is the name of the XML element that is specified in most of the
interfaces as well as the DTD. The use of lower case 'e' at the
beginning is inconsistent with CamelCase naming convention being
followed by RR specs and also causes problems with some automated tools.
This name was used because it was how the ebXML Error handling spec was
written by David Burdett. I would like to propose that we change all
occurrences of ebXMLError to EbXMLError globally in the RS specs as a
bug fix for Tokyo POC.


Association.type =>Association.associationType
------------------------------------------------
Since Association is a sub-type of ManagedObject it is ambiguous that
both define a type attribute. I propose to change the type attribute in
Association to associationType in the RS specs as a bug fix for Tokyo
POC.

I do not plan to re-distribute updated versions of the spec at this
point for the above changes. What is more effective is to make sure that
RR implementors in POC see this message and understand this change. If
folks have an issue with suggested fixes let me know. Otherwise I will
assume you agree with the changes. David you may want to change the
Error handling spec for the reasons I mentioned above.

Finally, please let me know of any other spec problems you may have
encountered and I will try and propose a fix in a timely manner.

--
Regards,
Farrukh