A minor question from David Hull on 2005-03-08 (public-ws-addressing@w3.org from March 2005)

From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 13:56:26 -0500
To: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Message-id: <422DF55A.7000307@tibco.com>

Why do we predefine a "reply" relationship but not a "fault" 
relationship?  The idea would be that a fault would be tagged with 
(fault, requestMID) as opposed to (reply, requestMID).

I had expected to see this as a resolved issue in the issues list, but 
apparently not.  I haven't trawled through the mailing list archives, so 
apologies if it's already been done to death.

Received on Tuesday, 8 March 2005 18:56:59 UTC