(i'm not so sure that anyone is following this group, all seem so wave- y nowdays...)
I think i found the following minor issues with the draft spec of the published version of "Google wave Conversation Model": 1) It would be better to number the chapters for facilitating references. 2) chapter "Model"/"Document namespaces and validation", namespace for manifest-documents: replace 'conversation' with 'conv'. 3) next chapter, "Documents"/"Blip Document", example blip document: <contributor> tag is not closed. 4) next 2 sections, the heading-levels of the same-named "Conversation manifest document" chapters may be reversed. It would be better to differentiate the first one by naming it as "Conversation manifest document example", the same to the previous section "Blip document example". 5) 4) same section, 2nd "Conversation manifest document", phrase «Thread ids have no semantic meaning» should become «Thread ids have no semantic meaning unless referenced by an in-line reply.» 6) chapter "Conversation manifest elements", //peer// element missing a meaningful description. 7) chapter "Example Conversation", the phrase «The conversation manifest has an id of "conversation" ...» may be better «The conversation manifest has an id of "conv+root" ...» --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave Protocol" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
