W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > July 2001

Re: default fault destination

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@idoox.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:20:47 +0200 (CEST)
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
cc: XML Distributed Applications List <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0107232018550.19742-100000@mail.idoox.com>
 I think that we can distinguish one more layer here - the
message pattern. So we have SOAP Application using a Message
Pattern using a Transport. I think the appropriate place for
specifying fault delivery is in the Message Pattern layer,
whichever of the pair Application/Protocol Binding happens to
specify it.

                            Jacek Kopecky


On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Mark Nottingham wrote:

 > In some proposals for a transport binding, there's a notion of a
 > default fault destination; e.g., "when using HTTP, deliver any faults
 > generated back to the client."
 > I'm wondering if it's more appropriate to define this in the SOAP
 > application (e.g. RPC), and leave the transport agnostic about fault
 > delivery.
 > Thoughts?
Received on Monday, 23 July 2001 14:20:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:14 UTC