- From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 22:53:48 +0200 (CEST)
- To: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
- cc: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Marc, here's my +1, it's nice and simple. 8-)
Jacek Kopecky
Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox)
http://www.systinet.com/
On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Marc Hadley wrote:
> +1, how about something along the lines of:
>
> "An ultimate SOAP receiver MUST correctly process the immediate
> children of the SOAP body (see 5.3 SOAP Body). However, with the
> exception of SOAP faults (see ....), part 1 of this specification
> (this document) mandates no particular structure or interpretation
> of these elements and provides no standard means for specifying
> the processing to be done."
>
> Marc.
>
> Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:
>
> > With the recent acceptance of the resolution to issue 192 [1], I think
> > we are in a good position to close issue 201 [2] as follows: We instruct
> > the editors to add a reference in the text in section 2 [3] (see below)
> > to point to the definition of a SOAP fault [4] as being the only type of
> > body defined by the SOAP 1.2 specification.
> >
> > "An ultimate SOAP receiver MUST correctly process the immediate children
> > of the SOAP body (see 5.3 SOAP Body). However, Part 1 of this
> > specification (this document) mandates no particular structure or
> > interpretation of these elements, and provides no standard means for
> > specifying the processing to be done."
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
> > mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com
> >
> > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlp-comments/2002Apr/0021.html
> > [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues.html#x201
> > [3]
> > http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/04/11/soap12-part1-1.86.html#structint
> > erpbodies
> > [4]
> > http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/04/11/soap12-part1-1.86.html#soapfault
> >
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 16:54:15 UTC