W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > September 2002

RE: Issue 288b: mustUnderstand v MusUnderstand

From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 09:58:00 -0700
Message-ID: <92456F6B84D1324C943905BEEAE0278E01FC6438@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: "W3C Public Archive" <www-archive@w3.org>, "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>, "Nilo Mitra" <EUSNILM@am1.ericsson.se>, "Noah Mendelson" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>

Ahh, OK. I'd not realized that the only place we had the mismatch was
the fault code. I agree we should not change at this time. Close issue
288b with no action?

Gudge

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:moreau@crf.canon.fr] 
> Sent: 02 September 2002 14:49
> To: Martin Gudgin
> Cc: W3C Public Archive; Marc Hadley; Nilo Mitra; Noah 
> Mendelson; Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
> Subject: Re: Issue 288b: mustUnderstand v MusUnderstand
> 
> 
> Hmmm... all faults start with a capital letter, so for 
> consistency we would also have to rename all other faults. 
> Personally, I'd don't like the current Uppercase convention; but 
> at this stage, I think we should stick with it (and maybe raise a 
> WSDL issue).
> 
> Jean-Jacques.
> 
> Martin Gudgin wrote:
> > I propose we sweep the spec and make sure we use mustUnderstand 
> > everywhere
> > 
> > Gudge
> > 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 2 September 2002 12:58:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:22 GMT