recent spec issues

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

Sorry it's so near the line, but here are some points that have come up in
revising the abstract msg part of the spec, and reviewing the rest of it.
Some are application of previously agreed things, some interpretation of
previously agreed, some thing that we haven't got clear ourselves:

addresses: additional info ONLY in btp msg itself, rest is in carrier

inferior names and handles: handle (nee index) is unambigous, set by
Composer;  name, human-readable(ish) is in a qualifier, specified only on
BEGIN, ENROL and INF_STATUSES items.  Name can be influenced by application
information.

extensibility: must-be-understood (default TRUE) allowed on any fields in
future versions.

qualifiers : must-be-understood changed default to TRUE

timelimits moved to qualifiers : 3 separate ones - transaction timelimit,
inferior timeout, minimum inferior timeout

context_reply added.

Communicators - action with app & context, context-reply is distinct from
btp&btp&btp action. Two kinds of communicator ?

abstract msg text - changed to to apply to cohesion:inf (or term:cohesion)
as well as atom:inf.

Should it be prepare/inferiors or request_prepare/inferiors from Terminator
to Composer ?

Qualifiers - conformance requirement ?  - 'should' for timelimits, 'may'
for others inf names ?


Peter

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