Martin, thanks for this next installment.
Question: previously you sent pages up to 62. Are there no additional
markups to those pages, i.e., this is really just additional marked pages,
or does this file replace prior
those as you added new markings to those?
E.g., I have 3 files now. pages 1 -32 marked, pages 32 to 62 marked, and
this file, which I am tentatively naming pages-63-123 unless you tell me
this subsumes the prior 32 to 62 file.
As for additional effort, there is no major hurry, I hope to get started on
editing and writing changed sections but honestly I think that may be
February before I get to it.
So if you keep chipping away at this review as you have time it would be
great.
Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology |
www.tresys.com
Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are
subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy
<http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_policies.php>
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 6:29 PM Martin Westhead <martin(a)westhead.me> wrote:
> [image: PDF file]
> gwdrp-dfdl-v1.0.5-r11-change-…
>
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Zr5mV5sJduiSThXmq8Ria6Lpf9B14bfs/view?usp=…>
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> Here is the latest version of the comments - I’m up to page 123 (still a
> ways to g o I’m afraid).
>
> I have to say it’s great the see DFDL finished. I’m excited for the small
> part I have played in its journey.
>
> Things definitely improved after page 82. Since it became more clearly
> reference and less narrative and the forward references were referring to
> things that were closer and at a much more detailed level.
>
> So I think the real challenge with the doc is pages 20-80 that seem to be
> telling a story but use concepts and ideas that have not be
> defined/introduced to the reader. Meaning that the doc would need multiple
> passes to be comprehensible. My suggestion would be to try to extend the
> introductory material to introduce some of the key missing ideas like
> Infoset and property and talk a little about how the properties are
> arranged on the XML elements. It probably not that much but could make the
> doc much more comprehensible.
>
> The next few weeks I am mostly going to be slammed - I’m racing to deliver
> value in my new role and have a lot of ground to cover. But I’m happy to
> chip away at the doc as best I can (commenting is faster now post p82). Let
> me know if there is a date beyond which it is no longer useful?
>
> Thanks for pulling me back in - its great to see what you have created...
>
> Martin
>
I created 4 new errata in the errata document corresponding to Actions 279,
293, 314, and 306.
I skipped the route of creating trackers first - just to reduce the number
of steps.
The updated errata document for review has been uploaded to redmine here:
https://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf_files/13384?download=
I also have added numerous formatting related change items to the tracker
for minor/typographical changes here:
https://redmine.ogf.org/issues/233
Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Tresys Technology |
www.tresys.com
Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are
subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy
<http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_policies.php>
