Re: Issue 182: Fault Code restriction: "At Most One Fault Proposal"

+1

"Williams, Stuart" wrote:

> My conclusion is that the revised proposal, "If processing is unsuccessful,
> at-most one fault MAY be generated by the node." is appropriate on two
> grounds:
>
> a) Some failure conditions permit or advise, but do not mandate
>    the generation of a fault.
>
> b) It is not clear the the failure to generate an optional
>    (and even a mandatory) fault lead to interoperability
>    problems that would necessitate a MUST.