RE: New LC Issue: Clarify section 4.1

I would also like to see this MUST removed as I agree it is confusing and 
untestable.
I have a recollection that when discussing i70 [1] we couldn't see where 
the MUST had come from (it wasn't in the resolution to i56 [2]) and that 
it shouldn't be there but that recollection isn't in the minutes for the 
resolution of i70 :-(

Cheers,
David

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/wd-issues/#i070
[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/5/09/f2f-minutes.html#i056

David Illsley
Web Services Development
MP127, IBM Hursley Park, SO21 2JN
+44 (0)1962 815049 (Int. 245049)
david.illsley@uk.ibm.com

----------------------------------------------
From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com> 
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 11:44:04 -0700
Message-ID: 
<37D0366A39A9044286B2783EB4C3C4E8022CB290@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> 

To: <public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org> 
Section 4.1 Destination

 

This section says "In the absence of additional runtime information, the
value of the [destination] message addressing property for a message
sent to an endpoint MUST match the value of the {address} property ..." 

 

The use of MUST in conjunction with "additional runtime information"
makes this phrase a bit confusing.  The MUST implies that this condition
is testable, but the rest of the text shatters that implication.
Perhaps this could be reworded to remove the MUST, for example "the
value of [destination] ... typically matches the value of the {address}
property."

 

 [  Jonathan Marsh  ][  jmarsh@microsoft.com
<mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com>   ][  http://spaces.msn.com/auburnmarshes
<http://spaces.msn.com/auburnmarshes>   ]