- From: Youenn Fablet <youenn.fablet@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:50:36 +0100
- To: Tom Jordahl <tjordahl@adobe.com>
- Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Tom Jordahl wrote: > We should certainly specify the HTTP code for in-only. Should be a 2xx > code (doesn't WS-I BP say 201?) > Agreed. > And as Tony said the robust-inonly has a HTTP status specified per > section 6.6 - Specifying HTTP Error Code for Faults. > The robust-inonly has a error code when a fault is sent back. When no fault is sent, we do not say what code to send back, typically a 2XX code as in the inonly case. Youenn > > -- > Tom Jordahl > Adobe ColdFusion Team > > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of youenn fablet > Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 8:55 AM > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Subject: Mapping WSDL meps to the HTTP binding > > > Reading the HTTP binding specification I have the following comment. > Currently the mapping from WSDL meps to HTTP binding messages is > described in section 6.4.1. > Basically it says that the wsdl input message is the http request > message and the wsdl output message, if any is the http response > message. > I wonder whether this description is sufficient for the inonly and > especially robust-inonly wsdl meps. > At least, we might need to specify the HTTP code to use in the response, > > especially for the robust-inonly. > Should it be 200, 202 or left unspecified as it is currently? > Are there other things that need to be specified? > What do you think? > Youenn > > >
Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2006 07:51:20 UTC