binding.ws and WSDL extensibility -- new proposed wording

On today's extended call we decided to change the wordings of section 
2.6 Support for WSDL extensibility to address Dave's concern. 
Specifically, we decide to say something along the lines of:
(1) wsdl allows extension, go look at what the rules are in the wsdl 
spec, (2) we define the following extension and what the MUST-ness for 
that is

I took an action to provide text for the change.

For you reference currently section 2.6 says:
-----
2.6 Support for WSDL extensibility
When a Web Service binding is specified using the @wsdlElement 
attribute, the details of the binding are specified by the WSDL element 
referenced by the value of the attribute. WSDL elements allow for 
extensibility via elements as well as attribute. The Web Service binding 
allows the use of such extensibility in WSDL. Note that as a consequence 
of this, when using this form of Web Service binding, it is not possible 
to determine whether the binding is supported by the SCA runtime without 
parsing the referenced WSDL element and its dependent elements.
-----

I would like to propose that we say the following in section 2.6:
-----
2.6 Support for WSDL extensibility

When a Web Service binding is specified using the @wsdlElement 
attribute, the details of the binding are specified by the WSDL element 
referenced by the value of the attribute. Per the WSDL specification, 
WSDL elements allow for extensibility via elements as well as 
attributes, and it specifies rules for processing such elements. The Web 
Service binding does not constrain the use of such extensibility in WSDL 
and relies on the rules specified in the WSDL specification for 
processing such extended elements.

This binding requires that the SCA runtime MUST support the WSDL 
extensions [include-a-list-of-extensions] defined at 
[include-a-list-of-refs].

Note that as a consequence of this, when using this form of Web Service 
binding, it is not possible to determine whether the binding is 
supported by the SCA runtime without parsing the referenced WSDL element 
and its dependent elements.
-----

I have not included the list of extensions (and their references) since 
at this point it is very likely going to change. Currently we have 
extensions for intents and conversation. It is possible that the 
conversational extension may be removed and a new extension for callback 
may be added. Therefore this is a TBD. But I'm suggesting via this 
proposal that all the extensions that are defined in SCA (assembly) be 
required.

Comments?

-Anish
--