RE: bug 11899

Not hearing any objection - I did what was suggested in comment #4 - 
removed the text in question.

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.



Ram Jeyaraman <Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com> 
02/04/2011 06:19 PM

To
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, Gilbert Pilz <gilbert.pilz@oracle.com>
cc
"public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
Subject
RE: bug 11899






Removing the text in question seems fine.
 
From: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org 
[mailto:public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Doug Davis
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 2:13 PM
To: Gilbert Pilz
Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Subject: Re: bug 11899
 

What do other's think? 

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog. 


Gilbert Pilz <gilbert.pilz@oracle.com> 
02/04/2011 02:48 PM 


To
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS 
cc
public-ws-resource-access@w3.org 
Subject
Re: bug 11899
 








I'm OK with this.

It's amusing that we go to so much trouble to describe the [Code] property 
when, in all of WS-RA, we only define two s12:Receiver faults; both in 
WS-Enum.

~ gp

On 2/1/2011 3:53 PM, Doug Davis wrote: 

All 
 please review the bug 11899 ( 
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11899 ) - Li has found some 
interesting info and I think we're better off if we just remove the entire 
text in question.    If people are ok with this perhaps we can re-resolve 
it thru email. 

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog. 
----- Forwarded by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM on 02/01/2011 06:52 PM ----- 

bugzilla@jessica.w3.org 
Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org 
02/01/2011 06:50 PM 
 


To
public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org 
cc

Subject
[Bug 11899] All: fault section table is missing both soap versions
 









http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11899

--- Comment #4 from Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com> 2011-02-01 23:50:45 UTC 
---
Actually, I'd prefer to just remove those lines of text from the spec.
Meaning remove:
- - - - 
For SOAP 1.2, the [Code] property MUST be either "Sender" or "Receiver". 
These
properties are serialized into text XML as follows:
<table>
SOAP Version     Sender             Receiver
SOAP 1.2     s12:Sender     s12:Receiver 
</table>
- - - - - 

We don't need the mapping table since each Code property already 
has either s12:Sender or s12:Receiver - this makes the table
pointless.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.