RE: Optional SOAP response; the transfer binding view

Some specific comments called out:

#1. 7.5.1.2:
202.  "The request has been accepted, but no response envelope is
provided. Any further application processing is beyond the scope of this
use of the .."

I'd prefer to not use the word 'accepted'.  The 200 entry doesn't say
anything about "accepted".  

I'd say:
"The request has completed and no response envelope is provided.

#2. 7.5.1.2
" "Receiving" (which will immediately transition to "Success")"

I'd prefer to simply say "Success", or say under what conditions that
transition to success will happen " "Receiving" (which will immediately
transition to "Success" if there is no response body)"

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-dist-app-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 7:57 AM
> To: Mark Baker
> Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Optional SOAP response; the transfer binding view
> 
> 
> I think the redraft I posted at [1] is consistent with the assumptions
and
> conclusions in your note.  Specifically, the inboundMessage and
> outputBoundMessage properties continue to consistent of the entire
SOAP
> level message, including things like the WebMethod when appropriate.
All
> that's changed is that (a) the request/response MEP makes clear that
the
> response messages for that MEP need not contain a SOAP envelope and
(b)
> the HTTP binding makes clear that the correct embodiment of an
otherwise
> successful "no envelope" response is an status code of 202.
> 
> Noah
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2006Jan/0050.html
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 13 January 2006 23:03:01 UTC