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

Re: Issue 143: Client and Server fault code names

From: Martin Gudgin <marting@develop.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 16:30:20 -0000
Message-ID: <001d01c16160$2d15e990$977ba8c0@greyarea>
To: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek@systinet.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
The issues are orthogonal. But if we decide to make one change ( hence
breaking existing implementations ) it would probably also be worth making
the other.

Gudge

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek@systinet.com>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: Issue 143: Client and Server fault code names


> 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 11:31:20 GMT

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