After the war the entente didn't hand over Italy their promised territory which lead to resentment. Was there specific reasons for this? E.g. Did they feel Italy didn't provide enough to the war effort and gave them what they felt was enough to compensate Italy for joining them ? Additionally The treaty also talks about a partitioning of turkey and how some land should go to Italy however later Britain and France would go on to make the Sykes-Picot agreement in secret just a year later (1916) were they planning on disavowing the agreement with Italy that early?
I have discussed this a bit from the Italian point of view here.
It is probably fair to say that Great Britain and France could have exerted more influence during peace talks in favor of the Italian demands. By that time though, the European outlook was markedly different from that devised in 1914-15, a fact mirrored by the evolution of the various "treaties" and "agreements".
It is also telling - and evidence both of the sclerotization of the Italian political establishment on principles that were already surpassed by history and of the dramatic conseqence that any acceptance of a revision of the letter of the Treaty of London would have had on the internal politics arena - that the official Government position remained against any discussion of dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire (see for example the Foreign Ministry S. Sonnino's relation to the chamber on October 25^th 1917 - that I didn't include in the previous answer because I had jet to come across it).
Edit: Of course, much can be said of the French and British point of view; and I am too looking forward to any additional information.