- 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
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 UTC