- From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 09:58:00 -0700
- To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Cc: "W3C Public Archive" <www-archive@w3.org>, "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>, "Nilo Mitra" <EUSNILM@am1.ericsson.se>, "Noah Mendelson" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Ahh, OK. I'd not realized that the only place we had the mismatch was the fault code. I agree we should not change at this time. Close issue 288b with no action? Gudge > -----Original Message----- > From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:moreau@crf.canon.fr] > Sent: 02 September 2002 14:49 > To: Martin Gudgin > Cc: W3C Public Archive; Marc Hadley; Nilo Mitra; Noah > Mendelson; Henrik Frystyk Nielsen > Subject: Re: Issue 288b: mustUnderstand v MusUnderstand > > > Hmmm... all faults start with a capital letter, so for > consistency we would also have to rename all other faults. > Personally, I'd don't like the current Uppercase convention; but > at this stage, I think we should stick with it (and maybe raise a > WSDL issue). > > Jean-Jacques. > > Martin Gudgin wrote: > > I propose we sweep the spec and make sure we use mustUnderstand > > everywhere > > > > Gudge > > > >
Received on Monday, 2 September 2002 12:58:31 UTC