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

RE: RPC -- is it a module. One last try.

From: Eugene Kuznetsov <eugene@datapower.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 19:18:10 -0500
To: "Ray Whitmer" <rayw@netscape.com>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@akamai.com>
Cc: "marwan sabbouh" <ms@mitre.org>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NDBBLGLOJMHANDPKJOCOGEGEDDAA.eugene@datapower.com>


> Are modules permitted to extend the fault codes, should we have extra 
> fault codes in the core for RPC, or should we ignore these added 
> failures for an RPC module such as missing a required argument?

In general, it seems desirable that they be extensible.

\\ Eugene Kuznetsov
\\ eugene@datapower.com
\\ DataPower Technology, Inc.

Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2001 19:16:33 GMT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: marwan sabbouh: "Re: [i48]: XML Protocol WG Issues list discussion"
Previous message: David Ezell: "[i48]: XML Protocol WG Issues list discussion"
In reply to: Ray Whitmer: "Re: RPC -- is it a module. One last try."

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:59 GMT