W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlp-comments@w3.org > November 2002

FW: Proposal for editorial clarification in part 2, section 4.2.2 RPC Response

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 11:59:33 -0800
Message-ID: <68B95AA1648D1840AB0083CC63E57AD6096E7D0F@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <xmlp-comments@w3.org>
Cc: <w3c-xml-protocol-wg@w3.org>


The WG decided to accept this proposal.

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen [mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 14:27
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Cc: fallside@us.ibm.com
Subject: Proposal for editorial clarification in part 2, section 4.2.2
RPC Response




As a minor editorial comment, in part of part 2, section 4.2.2 [1], the
last sentence says

"An RPC response MUST NOT contain both a result and a fault, because a
result indicates success and a fault indicates failure."

This seems to be a leftover from old days: Given the description of
faults as part of the general SOAP model [2], it is impossible to have
the case that a SOAP message can contain a fault and a non-fault body at
the same time. As a result, this MUST requirement seems to be at best
redundant with the general SOAP rules.

I propose to simply delete the sentence. Are there any objections to
this?

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen 
mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com 

[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part2.xml#rpcresponse
[2]
http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/06/LC/soap12-part1.xml#procsoapmsgs
Received on Wednesday, 6 November 2002 15:00:04 GMT

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