Issue 166 - Binding of Faults in HTTP Binding

I took an action on this week's call to look into
decisions made surrounding faults in the HTTP binding.

seems to me the Action to "Close 166 with adopting Paul's
proposal with ONE code" was simply lost. here's the history:

This is issue 166:

which was discussed on the 2004-05-27 telcon:

proposal map HTTP fault codes to abstract faults in the HTTP binding:

which was modified and +1'd by Hugo on the list:

The proposal was discussed by the WG at the 2004-06-07 teslcon [sic]:

with the modification that only one fault code would be specified
(original proposal was for a list of codes would be routed to a
single abstract fault) - and recorded as follows:

* RESOLUTION: Close 166 with adopting Paul's proposal with ONE code
* ACTION: editors to incorporate Paul's proposal with ONE http code

which was ?ED on the AI list for the 2004-06-10 telcon:

and not mentioned in the 2004-06-17 telcon Agenda:

*but* no mention of it on the ED-To-Do list.

As Hugo raised on today's call, the HTTP fault is missing
from our latest draft, though the pseudo-schema has a place holder:

<-- New HTTP Fault binding in here? -- >
    <fault ref="xs:QName"
           wsoap:subcodes="list of xs:QName" >
      <documentation />?

there's no XML representation or component model mapping for HTTP
faults. it just looks like the action went AWOL - c'est la vie.


Paul Sumner Downey
Web Services Integration
BT Exact

Received on Thursday, 15 July 2004 17:37:50 UTC