- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 13:38:30 -0400
- To: "Glen Daniels" <gdaniels@macromedia.com>
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Doi! I think more than my wrist is broken. 8-) Thanks -Dug "Glen Daniels" <gdaniels@macromedia.com> on 07/21/2001 01:34:37 PM To: Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS cc: Subject: Re: new MU Fault header Since any fault will be generated by a single node (faulting will stop the message from progressing to the next hop), I believe the faultactor field already covers this. --G ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Davis" <dug@us.ibm.com> To: <xml-dist-app@w3.org> Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 1:08 PM Subject: new MU Fault header > With the new MU fault header we return a list of the > headers that were not understood - should we consider > adding something (an attribute?) that tells which SOAP > Node generated the fault? In a multi-hop message path > it might be nice for the Node receiving the fault to know > which Node didn't like the message. I guess this could > apply to all faults not just MU faults. > -Dug >
Received on Saturday, 21 July 2001 13:38:35 UTC