RE: Issue 192 & R803

>Looks that way, to me this is a subtle change in semantics, the first 
>version says that the body of a fault message can only have 
>one fault in 
>the body but says nothing about any other EIIs in the body, the second 
>that the body can only have one fault and no accompanying EIIs. We 
>should be careful when incorporating comments like this that we don't 
>subvert the WG process...

Yes, I absolutely agree - good thing that this is now a part of a
proposal so that it is being called out!

Henrik

Received on Monday, 15 April 2002 12:27:34 UTC