W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > December 2005

Re: [Fwd: Toward more fully-formed options]

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:38:00 -0500
Message-ID: <c70bc85d0512141238j4d0d519x1be2dd3f5c85d71e@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org

On 12/14/05, David Hull <dmh@tibco.com> wrote:
>  Mark Baker wrote:
>  On 12/14/05, David Hull <dmh@tibco.com> wrote:
>  What's a response?
>  I'm not sure I follow, but;
> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec6.html#sec6
>  I just wanted to be sure you meant "HTTP response" and not some other kind
> (e.g, SOAP envelope, but that's specifically excluded).

Phew, you had me worried there! 8-)

>  Section 6 that you link starts with " After receiving and interpreting a
> request message, a server responds with an HTTP response message."  As far
> as I can tell, the only way you don't get a response back is in the event of
> a failure, either of the server or the transport.  The client can't
> generally tell the difference, so I lump these together under "transport
> failure", as in
> Transport failures may occur anywhere, including an in-only MEP over a
> fire-and-forget transport.  If this is to be considered as a SOAP message,
> each subitem of 3 [and probably other items as well] will need to be amended
> in a tedious but straightforward way. If I've missed some other possibility,
> please let me know.

Yes, I think you've missed the possibility of the server not sending a
response within a timeframe that the client deems suitable.

Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.       http://www.markbaker.ca
Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2005 20:38:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:28 UTC