W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > May 2006

Final SC3 text

From: <michael.mahan@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 2 May 2006 10:56:35 -0700
Message-ID: <A5F46F7A688C084782E8C52B76368613027CB40D@sdebe101.NOE.Nokia.com>
To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

Satisfying an AI from last week to put to the list the final 
SC3 disposition.

Last issue was resolved in last week's telecon with concurrence 
to Chris's last email. 
See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2006Apr/0026.html

>From the ML:
chris: Had lengthy discussion, but concluded we were on same page but 
using different words. Key aspect of proposals was people misreading 
"envelope", "message", "response" etc. Original proposal read "start 
of response envelope" available. 
... but "envelope" is just a property of the response message. All 
agree that whether envelope is present has nothing to do with when we 
start sending it. So change text from "response envelope" to "response".


Here is the final disposition:
----------------------------------------------------------------
Issue: Does/can OutboundMessage abstraction handle the 202/204 case? 
Can an OutboundMessage have no envelope?

Target: Table 7 - "Receiving" row

Proposed edits/actions:
From: 
'***Either a) Start of response envelope available in 
http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/mep/OutboundMessage or b) indication 
from the application that no such envelope is to be send in the
response.'

To: 
'Start of response available in
http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap/mep/OutboundMessage.'
Received on Tuesday, 2 May 2006 17:57:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:21 GMT