[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [bt-spec] addresses and identification
In the interests of trying to make some forward progress on this issue, I'd like to make the following proposal: (i) we continue with the URI and address split as proposed and (ii) we have a separate issue about whether or not entity identity modification is allowed within BTP. It is the latter point on which our proposal hinges, but we do not believe that this should derail a 1.0 version of the specification. We have had a week of back-and-forth emails and discussions about one point of view or another and I don't really think either side has made any progress in convincing the other since Wednesday. We are happy enough with (i) for now, as long as this separate issue is recorded and eventually discussed (if need be, post 1.0 since we can work either way). If a subsequent discussion and vote on this issue then leads to an agreement that identity modification is to be supported, then there will obviously need to be modifications to the rest of the protocol but that should be supportable in an extensible manner anyway. Mark. ---------------------------------------------- Dr. Mark Little, Distinguished Engineer, Transactions Architect, HP Arjuna Labs Email: mark_little@hp.com Phone: +44 191 2606216 Fax : +44 191 2606250
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC