- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 12:51:39 -0800
- To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Agreed; making it a MUST would require implementations to do the checking, which might be onerous in certain situations. On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 12:50:58PM -0500, Mark Baker wrote: > > Mark Baker wrote: > > > > > > > > 2. Differing envelope namespace & "envelope" parameter > > > > > > (assuming we keep it) > > > > > > A recipient of such a SOAP message MUST send a VersionMismatch > > > fault. > > > > > > > That would mean a change to the meaning of the VersionMismatch fault. > > Not necessarily a bad thing, but worth noting. Perhaps a different error > > might be appropriate ? > > Yah, the more I think about it, the more I'm thinking that - in the > face of no concrete use case for its existence - we should scrap > envelope. It can be added later if needed. > > MB > -- > Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc. > Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker@planetfred.com > http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.planetfred.com > -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 7 January 2002 15:51:40 UTC