- From: Murali Janakiraman <murali@roguewave.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 16:58:24 -0800
- To: "'MOREAU Jean-Jacques'" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
The fact that we are separating status as success only(and nothing to do with error status), I tend to agree that these be split into 2 requirements, one for error and another for success status. Murali -----Original Message----- From: MOREAU Jean-Jacques [mailto:moreau@crf.canon.fr] Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 8:19 AM To: xml-dist-app@w3.org Subject: DR 703: 2 reqs in one + dup? I suggest the following requirement be split into two, 703a and 703b. Furthermore, I consider 703a to be a duplicate of requirement 200, bullet 3 ("Provision for specifying errors in a reply message.") DR703a The XP specification must define a means to convey error information as a fault. The capability of XP carrying a fault message must not depend on any particular protocol binding. DR703b The XP specification must define a mechanism or mechanisms to allow the transfer of status information within an XP message without resort to use of XP fault messages or dependence on any particular interaction model. Jean-Jacques.
Received on Wednesday, 15 November 2000 20:08:26 UTC