Issue-19: different proposal for resolution...

We've taken issue with lines 81-83 of 
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/26837/sca-jcabinding-1.1-spec-WD-01.pdf, 
which currently read:

"In this case, the identified WSDL binding must have an equivalent 
PortType with the SCA service or reference. In this case the endpoint 
address URI for the SCA service or reference must be provided via the 
URI attribute on the binding."

I'm confused.  Why bother with the second sentence at all?  When the 
@wsdlElement isn't present at all, we currently don't feel it necessary 
to highlight that the service or reference URI might be derived, or 
specified with the @uri attribute.  Why do we need to state this again 
here?  Especially since section 2.1 immediately follows, and pretty much 
tells you how to get a URI if one isn't available from the referenced 
WSDL information, I think this extra "clarification" doesn't help matters.

-Eric.