none
Community Content for Office Protocols RRS feed

  • Question

  • The Open Office Protocol set are sweet - very nice and thanks.

    In reading some of them carefully, there are some places where clarification would be useful and community content might be helpful.

    Can MS open up community content?

    Thomas Lee
    Friday, July 18, 2008 10:20 PM

Answers

  • Thomas,
    First I would suggest you download and review the newest versions of the documents published 8/28/2008. The documents can be found here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc307432.aspx

    As to your 3 bullet points:
    1) The document has been published in version 1.01. Would you review the new document in this area and clarify this bullet point against the new document?
    2) I am not sure I understand this bullet point. RFC 1738 shows URL scheme to be: //<user>:<password>@<host>:<port>/<url-path> where some or all of the parts can be excluded depending on the scheme of the IP protocol used. In this case DNS would only be used to resolve the <host> portion of the URL. We are open to suggestions on how to make this more clear.

    3) All references to <domain> are now shown without the double quotes. If you find any discrepancies let us know.


    Steve Smegner
    Application Development Consulting Group

    • Marked as answer by Steve Smegner Wednesday, September 24, 2008 7:27 PM
    Wednesday, September 24, 2008 7:27 PM

All replies

  • Thomas,
    Thanks for the positive feedback.

    I will be happy to pass along your suggestion.


    Steve Smegner
    Application Development Consulting Group
    Saturday, July 19, 2008 4:19 AM
  • Steve Smegner said:

    Thomas,
    Thanks for the positive feedback.

    I will be happy to pass along your suggestion.


    Steve Smegner
    Application Development Consulting Group

    Thanks. There is no doubt that this documentation is valuable. But it can be made even more so. Let me give you one small example of the sort of issue I'm seeing and what could be done. Look at the bottom of Page 9 of [MS-CONMFMT]:
    • The document talks about ports and host names that MOC uses to connect to an OCS server. However, in the bullet list, items for items 2, 4, and 6 the port number is not. I believe the port numbers for these are 5060 but I'm not sure (without doing more work to verify).
    • Secondly, this bullet list is possibly confusing in that :443" is not really a dns name. I suspect the fist bullet in ths list cold be written as ""sipinternal.<domain> - the client should use this A record, and port 443 for a TLS connection" But the specific domain name should be clarified.
    • Finally, in the final bullet list "<domain>" is not specified in italics, as it is in the earlier table. Is there any significance to this?
    These are relatively minor issues. But they could confuse developers who rely on these docs.  What port number is the client really using? Is there any difference between <domain> and <domain>? What are the exact names the client queires for?

    I guess if these protocols are 'open', they should also be 'open for comment'. I'd also like to think that these protocol descriptions should be open to being improved and corrected.



    Thomas Lee
    • Edited by Thomas Lee Sunday, July 20, 2008 1:13 PM minor imrovements in the wriing
    • Marked as answer by Thomas Lee Sunday, August 3, 2008 2:17 PM
    • Unmarked as answer by Thomas Lee Sunday, August 3, 2008 2:17 PM
    Saturday, July 19, 2008 12:32 PM
  • Thomas Lee said:

    Look at the bottom of Page 9 of [MS-CONMFMT]:
    • The document talks about ports and host names that MOC uses to connect to an OCS server. However, in the bullet list, items for items 2, 4, and 6 the port number is not. I believe the port numbers for these are 5060 but I'm not sure (without doing more work to verify).
    • Secondly, this bullet list is possibly confusing in that :443" is not really a dns name. I suspect the fist bullet in ths list cold be written as ""sipinternal.<domain> - the client should use this A record, and port 443 for a TLS connection" But the specific domain name should be clarified.
    • Finally, in the final bullet list "<domain>" is not specified in italics, as it is in the earlier table. Is there any significance to this?
    These are relatively minor issues. But they could confuse developers who rely on these docs.  What port number is the client really using? Is there any difference between <domain> and <domain>? What are the exact names the client queires for?

    Any news?

    Thomas Lee
    Saturday, July 26, 2008 12:03 AM
  • Thomas,
    Did you mean MS-CONMGMT? And are you looking at v1.0 released June 27, 2008? I cannot correlate your comments to page 9. I just want to make sure we are on the same page.

    Steve Smegner
    Applcation Development Consulting Group
    Wednesday, August 6, 2008 6:18 PM
  • Thomas,
    I haven't heard back from you. If you are still interested in pursuing this thread let me know.

    Steve Smegner
    Application Development Consulting Group
    Friday, September 5, 2008 9:54 PM
  • Steve Smegner said:

    Thomas,
    I haven't heard back from you. If you are still interested in pursuing this thread let me know.


    Sorry - For some reason I never saw your earlier reply. These refer to page 11.

    Re my first bullet point, I'm referring to the list at the bottom of page 9 in the document.

    The third bullet in my comments notes an 'earlier' table - what I meant was the bullet list at the top of page 11.

    These points are still broken - it would have been great to have community content allowed on the specs in MSDN Library to specifically point these out.

    Thomas Lee
    Saturday, September 6, 2008 10:48 AM
  • Steve Smegner said:

    Thomas,
    I haven't heard back from you. If you are still interested in pursuing this thread let me know.

    Steve Smegner
    Application Development Consulting Group


    see earlier comment/reply - sorry I missed your articles here - no idea why "alert me" didn't!

    Thomas Lee
    Saturday, September 6, 2008 10:49 AM
  • Thomas,
    First I would suggest you download and review the newest versions of the documents published 8/28/2008. The documents can be found here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc307432.aspx

    As to your 3 bullet points:
    1) The document has been published in version 1.01. Would you review the new document in this area and clarify this bullet point against the new document?
    2) I am not sure I understand this bullet point. RFC 1738 shows URL scheme to be: //<user>:<password>@<host>:<port>/<url-path> where some or all of the parts can be excluded depending on the scheme of the IP protocol used. In this case DNS would only be used to resolve the <host> portion of the URL. We are open to suggestions on how to make this more clear.

    3) All references to <domain> are now shown without the double quotes. If you find any discrepancies let us know.


    Steve Smegner
    Application Development Consulting Group

    • Marked as answer by Steve Smegner Wednesday, September 24, 2008 7:27 PM
    Wednesday, September 24, 2008 7:27 PM