Re: CR 20: amalgamated proposal

* Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com> [2006-02-16 13:16-0800]
> My 2c - this change isn't cost-effective.
[…]
> I'm worried about any change to the specs at this stage because of the
> general concern of unintended side-effects as we're trying to lock down
> interop results.  This change isn't directly motivated by results of the
> interop work, so it's not essential to address.  The status quo
> functions perfectly well, despite the aesthetic concerns which appear to
> be addressable only at the expense of whatever simplicity we have left.

I agree with Jonathan.

It is unwise so late in the game to try and fix a small problem with a
proposal larger than what is needed, however attractive the proposal
is.

> Therefore my preference is to close CR20 with no action.

I'd prefer we add the clarifying text from Paul[1], which seems to
clear up the confusion which was pointed out in the interop testing,
and is essentially the status quo.

Cheers,

Hugo

  1. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2006Feb/0061.html
-- 
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/