Re: missing documentation for streaming in-progress transactions

1.
I felt that this protocol documentation needs to include something
like a "Since: 2" notation (e.g. see how the javadoc API [1] does it)
otherwise with more message types and more protocol versions it is
quickly going to become too complicated to know what message or
message attribute belongs with what protocol.

2.
There are inconsistent terms used for a transaction id.
e.g.1 Sometimes called " Transaction id."
e.g.2 Sometimes called "Xid of the transaction"
I think there should be consistent terminology used on this page