The issue has been raised to divide the specification into two separate but related parts:

- Motivation: 
    - Make the layering of the structure clear, and make it 
      clear that negotiation is optional.
    - Also the feeling that agreement layer is more mature 
      than negotiation.
    - Large spec. doesn't allow us to fully focus on all the
      portions that need attention.
    - Ease adoption by other groups
    - More consistent with WS-* specs that tend to be smaller
      and composable 

  - How to do the split:  The general idea is to split the 
    agreement  structure and terms from the negotiation 
    portion.  Where's the responsibility for describing the 
    interactions of the two sub-docs.
    - Agreement factory, agreement port-types and states, and
      associated types in one part.  
    - Negotiation factory/port-type and related states in the 
      other part.  Asit suggests WS-Negotiation for this one,
      and interactions with other WS-* groups (e.g. 
      transactionality) is important here.  Alain suggests 
      maybe WS-AgreementNegotiation to
      make it clear that we're negotiating clearly wrt WS-
      Agreement.

  - Timeline for the new docs.:  They could be somewhat
     independent and allow us to deliver specs. for use by 
     other groups sooner.
.