W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing-eds@w3.org > January to March 2006

2004/ws/addressing ws-addr-wsdl.xml,1.69,1.70

From: Marc Hadley via cvs-syncmail <cvsmail@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 20:15:06 +0000
To: public-ws-addressing-eds@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1F8k6E-0002k6-H9@lionel-hutz.w3.org>

Update of /sources/public/2004/ws/addressing
In directory hutz:/tmp/cvs-serv10534

Modified Files:
	ws-addr-wsdl.xml 
Log Message:
Removed ed notes

Index: ws-addr-wsdl.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/2004/ws/addressing/ws-addr-wsdl.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.69
retrieving revision 1.70
diff -C2 -d -r1.69 -r1.70
*** ws-addr-wsdl.xml	13 Feb 2006 16:56:59 -0000	1.69
--- ws-addr-wsdl.xml	13 Feb 2006 20:15:04 -0000	1.70
***************
*** 1256,1264 ****
                          </tbody>
                      </table>
-                     <ednote>
-                         <name>MJH</name>
-                         <edtext>Given that [message id] is mandatory above, should [fault endpoint]
-                             also be required ?</edtext>
-                     </ednote>
                      <table border="1">
                          <caption>Message addressing properties for fault message.</caption>
--- 1256,1259 ----
***************
*** 1315,1323 ****
                          </tbody>
                      </table>
-                     <ednote>
-                         <name>MJH</name>
-                         <edtext>Should [fault endpoint] be prohibited in the above ? This would
-                             prevent getting a fault in response to a fault.</edtext>
-                     </ednote>
                  </div3>
                  <div3 id="wsdl20inout">
--- 1310,1313 ----
Received on Monday, 13 February 2006 20:15:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:19:41 GMT