- From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 13:15:12 -0500
- To: "Seaborne, Andy" <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Jan 6, 2006, at 3:41 PM, Seaborne, Andy wrote: > The other headers are not overloaded in this way - thay are not > mentioned by the general mapping of WSDL to HTTP nor in our > specific example. No, but as I just learned (or relearned, or something...), you can specify an HTTP header as part of a WSDL fault, and you can say whether that header is required or not. I believe that effectively makes headers part (conceivably) of a WSDL fault serialized in HTTP. We don't have that in our design, but I thought this was a point worth making (especially since I think I denied it explicitly somewhere in this thread). FWIW. Cheers, Kendall
Received on Monday, 9 January 2006 18:15:19 UTC