mandatory fault reason

• From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
• Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 17:20:21 +0200
• To: public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org
• Message-Id: <1115133621.3326.145.camel@Kalb>

Hi,

as an LC comment for WS-Addressing, I'd like to say that I think
WS-Addressing SOAP binding should not mandate the fault reason text (in
section 5). 

For example it's unclear from the spec whether the reason for Action Not
Supported fault is "The [action] cannot be processed at the receiver."
or "The http://example.com/deleteAccount cannot be processed at the
receiver." And this difference shouldn't even matter (compare with HTTP
reason phrase) but due to the MUST in section 5 this affects compliance.

To resolve my issue, I'd like the [Reason] part to become only
recommended, or suggested, not REQUIRED.

Best regards,

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Ph.D. student researcher
                   Digital Enterprise Research Institute
                   University of Innsbruck
                   http://www.deri.org/

Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2005 15:20:43 UTC