- From: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:13:13 +0100
- To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, moreau@crf.canon.fr
Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote: > 1) As to the question of determining when a SOAP fault is recognized > as an "active" fault in a SOAP message by referring to the text > already in SOAP 1.2, part 1 [1]: > > "To be recognized as carrying SOAP error information, a SOAP message > MUST contain exactly one SOAP Fault as the only child element of > the SOAP body. A SOAP fault element information item MAY appear > within a SOAP header block, or as a descendant of a child element > information item of the SOAP body; but, in such cases, the element > has no SOAP-defined semantics." > This implies that if I have a body with a fault as a direct child but the body also has additional child elements then the message isn't recognised as carrying fault info. Seems a bit arbitrary to me. This is why the idea of moving the fault outside the body and making messages either carry a body or a fault appealed to me. Lots of commentators were in favour of this change and I therefore think we should consider its merits further. Regards, Marc. -- Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com> XML Technology Centre, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Wednesday, 10 April 2002 06:14:04 UTC