[bt-spec] RE: Target Address & Target Additional Information

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

Jim,

In the abstract messages, the target addresses are there saying how the
message gets to where it is going. When the message is sent, the binding
name will determine how the message is being sent, and the binding address
where it is being sent to, so they don't need to be in the message. The
additional information does, since it is defined as being what is not used
by the carrier protocol. The binding address (i.e. the address as understood
by the carrier protocol identified by the binding name) may or may not be
actually carried in the binding protocol, but that's its problem (for http 2
it effectively is, though not all as one field)

The text on addresses at the beginning of the xml section states this, but
could explain more of the why perhaps (i.e. to include that paragraph). Or
possibly this should be included somewhere in the model.

Alternatively, we could change things so only the additional information is
in the abstract message and the target address is stated as lurking around
somewhere. I'm not sure this will be helpful.

Peter


> -----Original Message-----
> From: WEBBER,JIM (HP-UnitedKingdom,ex1) [mailto:jim_webber@hp.com]
> Sent: 27 January 2002 16:27
> To: Peter Furniss; alex@ceponkus.org; bt-spec@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Target Address & Target Additional Information
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I've been looking at the XML representation of the message set
> and comparing
> it to what's in the text descriptions. Asside from the expected missing
> angle bracket and so forth, there's a somewhat larger discrepancy.
>
> In the descriptive text, target address is given as a field  for all
> messages except CONTEXT whilst in the XML it is not.
>
> In the XML, target-additional-information is given as an element for all
> messages except CONTEXT, whilst in the descriptive text, it is not.
>
> Is it actually the case that the target address should appear
> throughout the
> XML and that target-additional-information should be restricted to the
> target address' additional-information field?
>
> Jim
>