Re: RPC -- is it a module. One last try.

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

Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2001 17:55:15 UTC