W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > August 2006

Re: Updated Table: wsaw:Anonymous Combinations

From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:13:15 -0400
To: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Arun Gupta <Arun.Gupta@Sun.COM>, W3C WS-Addressing Public List <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Message-id: <44E0D95B.2030708@tibco.com>
Christopher B Ferris wrote:
>
> There is an important, yet subtle distinction not captured in the
> table (either version).
>
> The SOAP MU fault will ALWAYS travel on the HTTP response REGARDLESS
> of what the wsa:faultTo, wsa:ReplyTo, etc. say. Thus, I think that you
> have to make
> it clear that this applies only to faults that are NOT SOAP-specific
> faults (MU and
> VM). Saying that the fault MAY be sent on the transport-specific
> backchannel is
> not enough. I think it needs to be made clear when this will be the
> case and when it
> will not.
This is a "Tony's Timeline" issue.  In case of an MU fault, WSA is not
engaged and none of the table applies.

It occurs to me that this distinction might be part of folklore but not
really written down anywhere official.
Received on Monday, 14 August 2006 20:21:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:14 GMT