W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlp-comments@w3.org > October 2001

Closing issue 68 (WAS: Issue 68 - status information)

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 14:01:57 -0800
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D055AB15B@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Oisin Hurley" <ohurley@iona.com>
Cc: <xmlp-comments@w3.org>

The WG has decided to close this issue with the resolution that we don't
call out or otherwise define any information and so status information
is handled as any other information that is not fault information. The
group believes this covers the requirement.

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Oisin Hurley [mailto:ohurley@iona.com] 
>Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 13:35
>To: xml-dist-app@w3c.org
>Subject: Issue 68 - status information
>
>
>Excerpt from the agenda:
>
>>. Issue 68, convey status information [13] (1.25 + 15) 
>Requirement 703b 
>>[14] says ".... must define a mechanism or mechanisms to allow the 
>>transfer of status information within an XMLP message without 
>resort to 
>>use of XMLP fault messages....". We need to clarify what exactly is 
>>meant by this requirement, decide whether or not to keep it, 
>and if so 
>>how do we resolve it.
>
>  .. the intent behind this requirement was to allow information not 
>related to the results of an operation to flow back with a 
>response - the use case being that status information could be 
>put in the message without having to resort to using fault 
>messages. I can't recall with any clarity exact details of 
>what was required - it is also with limited recall that I 
>think Ray Denenberg may have been the source of this 
>requirement. Ray, can you confirm or deny?
>
> cheers
>  --oh
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2001 17:02:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:42:26 GMT