RE: [bt-spec] Call for email vote: BT TC issue 1

[Peter Furniss <peter.furniss@choreology.com>]

I am voting YES on all the issues currently under ballot:
  1, 5, 12, 14, 20, 33, 46, 51, 54, 55, 58

on issue 1, there has been some offline discussion (partly on instant
messaging) about whether it should say URL or URI in :

>   Binding address format: This section status the format of the
>   "binding address" field of a BTP address for this binding. For
>   many bindings, this will be a URL of some kind; for other bindings
>   it may be some other form.

since the sentence is an explanation (not really normative), and a URL is a
location specification, involving any protcol/scheme, URL is probably
better, but I'd be content with URI.

> in SOAP Binding, add paragraph
>
>   Binding address format: shall be a URL, of type HTTP.

that should probably say ".. a URL of the http scheme". (and give reference
?)

(that would seem to be an editorial change)

Peter

------------------------------------------
Peter Furniss
Technical Director, Choreology Ltd
web: http://www.choreology.com
email:  peter.furniss@choreology.com
phone:  +44 20 7670 1679
direct: +44 20 7670 1783
mobile: 07951 536168
13 Austin Friars, London EC2N 2JX