RE: binding fault property placement inconsistencies

Thanks for your comment.  The WS Description Working Group tracked this
as a Last Call comment LC359 [1].  We accepted your suggested

If we don't hear otherwise within two weeks, we will assume this
satisfies your concern.


-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of Jacek
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 10:25 AM
Subject: binding fault property placement inconsistencies

Hi all,

while working on the RDF binding, I've noticed an inconsistency in where
fault properties are placed in bindings: 

SOAP binding puts wsoap:code and subcodes and wsoap:header on binding
fault, and the same does HTTP mapping with whttp:code and whttp:header.
This basically shows that most specific binding fault properties are put
on the bindings faults.

Inconsistently, HTTP binding puts whttp:transferCoding on the fault
reference within operations - do we have a use case for different
transferCodings for the same faults when used in different operations?
If not, I suggest that transferCoding is moved from operation/infault
and outfault to binding/fault.

Best regards,


Received on Thursday, 3 November 2005 20:52:12 UTC