W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org > December 2005

RE: Misc Comments - Part 2

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 13:45:32 -0000
Message-ID: <2A7793353757DB4392DF4DFBBC9522550276F16D@I2KM11-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <Arun.Gupta@Sun.COM>, <public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org>

Arun

> 4). There is no test for "Action Not Supported" fault. I thought at one 
> time we agreed that is the most common fault scenario (cant find 
> reference though). 

feel free to submit one!

> On a related point, I think test1240 should instead 
> be checking for "Action Not Supported" fault since that is more likely 
> to occur. A duplicate To or any other WS-A header in the SOAP message is 
> less likely to occur.

I think this goes to the heart of why I strongly dislike the
fault codes in the spec. They're not testable, and where they 
are, implicitly impose an order of procesing on an implementation.

Paul
Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2005 13:48:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:29:01 UTC