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

Re: Issue 288b: mustUnderstand v MusUnderstand

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 11:55:29 +0200
Message-ID: <3D748711.4030301@crf.canon.fr>
To: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
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>

Yep, that's what I'm proposing.

Martin Gudgin wrote:
> 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 Tuesday, 3 September 2002 05:55:44 GMT

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