Re: [business-transaction] Re: [bt-spec] URIs and address-as-X (M AJOR)

[Mark Little <mark_little@hp.com>]

> WE BELIEVE THE ADDRESSING FIELDS SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR IDENTIFICATION.
>
> WE BELIEVE THE IDENTIFICATION FIELDS SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR ADDRESSING.

> It might be if we agreed to lock into one carrier, and always use
> request/response (c.f OTS and TIP, which are closer to those patterns. Our
> input to BTP was consciously in the light of those (including
implementation
> experience of both).

If we are reduced to "shouting" and stating things like "I've done this
before so I know best" then we are definitely not getting anywhere with
this! Everyone here has implementation experience - some *much* more than
others, but we should not be going down that route.

If we cannot agree then we should state our arguments formally (possibly in
multiple attempts to address a specific issue) and vote on it as a group and
move on. It works in other standards bodies.

Mark.

----------------------------------------------
Dr. Mark Little (mark_little@hp.com)
Transactions Architect, HP Arjuna Labs
Phone +44 191 2606216
Fax   +44 191 2606250