paragraph 3.2.5.6 : There is two mistakes : "abstract_storagehome" and
"abstract""storagehome" are referenced instead of "abstract
storagehome
paragraph 3.2.5.1 : the production <abstract_storage_type_member> refers
to
<abstract_storage_type_dcl> which is defined in production 10 as
<psdl_state_dcl>.
Pick one or the other and changes references as required
Production 19 : "abstract_storagehome" is not correct. Replace it with
"abstract storagehome".
Chapter 1.5 mentions the ConnectorRegistry object. From the code sample I assume that it should be part of the CosPersistentState module. Hoveever, I am unable to find the refrence to the ConnectorRegistry from the appendix A.1, "Complete IDL" (shouldn't it be "Complete PSDL" instead?)
the ConnectorRegistry is present also in the appendix B, "Example: An Implementation of the Naming Service"
The referenced page cites the existence of a ConnectorRegistry in the CosPeristentState module. But there is no such interface in the IDL. Perhaps I've missed something?
In the PSDL state type grammar, the state member can't be a sequence type as the following text:
formal/02-06-05 on page 3-8
<psdl_state_type_spec> ::= <base_type_spec>
| <string_type> |
| <wide_string_type> |
| <abstract_storagetype_ref_type> |
| <scoped_name> ... <scoped_name> must denote a previously declared [abstract or local] interface, struct, union, type, [abstract] valuetype, or a previously defined abstract storagetype. ... |
It's very useful if the sequence type be a state member, which is currently not possible.
Resolution:
Replace the following text in formal/02-06-05 on page 3-8
<psdl_state_type_spec> ::= <base_type_spec>
| <string_type> |
| <wide_string_type> |
| <abstract_storagetype_ref_type> |
| <scoped_name> |
with
<psdl_state_type_spec> ::= <base_type_spec>
| <sequence_type> |
| <string_type> |
| <wide_string_type> |
| <abstract_storagetype_ref_type> |
| <scoped_name> |
1. formal/02-09-06 on page 1-6 import org.omg.*; CORBA.ORB myOrb = CORBA.ORB.init(); CosPersistentState.ConnectorRegistry connectorRegistry = CosPersistentState.ConnectorRegistryHelper.narrow( myOrb.resolve_initial_references("PSS") ); CosPersistentState.Connector connector = connectorRegistry.find_connector(""); ... 2. formal/02-09-06 on page B-6 public class NamingServer { public static void main(String[] args)
{ // initializes ORB CORBA.ORB myOrb = CORBA.ORB.init(args); // get connector registry CosPersistentState.ConnectorRegistry registry = CosPersistentState.ConnectorRegistryHelper. narrow( myOrb.resolve_initial_references("PSS") ); // get connector ... }Resolution:
1. Remove the following text in formal/02-09-06 on page 1-6
CosPersistentState.ConnectorRegistry connectorRegistry = CosPersistentState.ConnectorRegistryHelper.narrow( myOrb.resolve_initial_references("PSS") ); CosPersistentState.Connector connector = connectorRegistry.find_connector("");
2. Remove the following text in formal/02-09-06 on page B-6
// get connector registry CosPersistentState.ConnectorRegistry registry = CosPersistentState.ConnectorRegistryHelper. narrow( myOrb.resolve_initial_references("PSS") );
paragraph 3.2.6.4 : The <absract_storagehome_header> is not correctly
defined.
The production [<primary_key_dcl>] is missing. Add it.
Production 27 : a double quote is missing : {" instead of "{". Add the
double quote.
Production 45 : an underscore is missing in the name of the rule.
Replace <abstract storagehome_name> with <abstract_storagehome_name>
Production 48: there is a redundancy : square brackets are not
useful.Remove them
In ptc/01-06-02:
Production 10, rhs refers to a 'storagetype_local_op_dcl' which is defined
in production 24 as a 'storage_type_local_op_dcl. Pick one or the other
and change references as required...
Production 4 and Production 23 abstract_storagehome_name are defined
twice still. Remove one and reindex all proceeding productions.
Add the 'state' keyword to the keywords table it seems to have gone missing
between edits 
Perhaps a mention that the 'factory' and 'const' keywords are in common
to PSDL and IDL and that the 'provides' keyword is in common to PSDL
and CIDL. It might also be worth mentioning that the sharing is syntax only
as some people may confuse the keyword with the semantics they most
commonly use it in IDL / CIDL as opposed to the semantics it is employed
within PSDL...
See http://cgi.omg.org/pub/pss_ftf/vote3.pdf (color BLUE)