W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > April 2002

Re: Summarizing the last 192 discussion

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:38:20 -0500
To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Cc: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <20020403003820.C20848@www.markbaker.ca>
> I think it might be even simpler: we don't have to say anything about
> whether the SOAP fault is subordinate to the HTTP fault or vice verse -
> they *are* in sync by definition of the binding.

Now I'm confused. 8-/  I used to believe this, when I thought that
faultHint was authoritative, but now I wonder how you could say that
when, AFAICT, nowhere in the binding does it distinguish between a
fault received on a 200 response, and one received on a 500 response.
Both end up in the success state, and only the faultHint distinguishes
one from the other.

> FWIW, I don't think the
> notion of a fault-hint is useful and would be happy with it not being
> there.

Woohoo, agreement! 8-)

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Wednesday, 3 April 2002 00:45:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:09 GMT