RE: [wsrp] ExtensionDescription

[Rich Thompson <richt2@us.ibm.com>]

Andre Kramer wrote:
> My fundamental concerns are
totally with regards to the definition of extensions that 
> are outside the scope of WSRP.
These, as I understand it, are to be carried in <extensions> 
> elements containing an “any”
value and for reason of future evolution and extensibility should 
> be left open and not described
in our protocol IMHO.

As far as I know, no one has proposed
describing extensions within the protocol. What has
been proposed is providing an in-band
means for transferring a description of an extension. 

Rich