>True, but the description for 500 already says "Indicates that the >response message contained in the following HTTP response entity body >may contain a SOAP fault." Note the "may". Why bother to change the >entry for 400 when the 500 entry already does what we want ? I think it was in order to get a better mapping between SOAP and HTTP faults, no? >If we change the entry for 400, do we also need to do so for >any of the >other entries in table 17 ? All of them ? Hmm, I think it would only apply to 400 and 500 codes as these are the only ones used in the mapping (IIRC). HenrikReceived on Tuesday, 17 September 2002 20:47:55 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:41:54 GMT