- From: Ray Whitmer <rayw@netscape.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 15:01:45 -0800
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@akamai.com>
- CC: marwan sabbouh <ms@mitre.org>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Mark Nottingham wrote: > > I also support this view. So, assuming that this view prevails that RPC is a module, the original question was: Are modules permitted to extend the fault codes, should we have extra fault codes in the core for RPC, or should we ignore these added failures for an RPC module such as missing a required argument? How is a missing RPC argument different from elements of a message that won't validate or values that are out of range? I do not know the intent of those who designed the fault codes, whether they should be fixed or extensible. Ray Whitmer rayw@netscape.com
Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2001 17:55:15 UTC