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

Re: Issue 143: Client and Server fault code names

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 15:10:11 +0100 (CET)
To: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
cc: "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0110301504160.23943-100000@mail.idoox.com>
 Hi. 8-)
 I think that the impact on current implementations would not be
too big as the implementations already have to change the
namespace URIs to check against so this change can be
incorporated as well.
 And I think, as Gudge already has pointed out (thanks, Gudge)
that issue 130 is related and might be considered at the same
time, but on the other hand, while related, the issues are
orthogonal so not considering them together won't make any harm.
 Best regards,

                   Jacek Kopecky

                   Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox)
                   http://www.systinet.com/



On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:

 > Issue 143 below is currently marked as editorial:
 >
 >      Table speaks of 'Client' faults and 'Server' faults. I
 >      think that this is the only place where the notion of
 >      'Client' and 'Server' arise. Concepts of 'Client' and
 >      'Server' are not developed anywhere in the document.
 >
 >      It seems to me that 'Client' is more akin to 'Sender'
 >      and 'Server' is more akin to 'Recipient'. Regardless,
 >      I'm not sure personnally that 'Client' and 'Server' are
 >      appropriate distinctions to make in a generic SOAP
 >      messaging framework.
 >
 > The editors suggest that, in the prose, we amend 'Client' to read
 > 'Sender' and 'Server' to read 'Receiver'.
 >
 > However, the editors wonder whether they sould also be changing
 > the fault codes to match. Advantage: this would make the spec
 > more consistent. Disadvantage: possible impact on existing
 > implementations.
 >
 > Jean-Jacques.
 >
Received on Tuesday, 30 October 2001 09:10:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:04 GMT