W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > March 2002

Summarizing the last 192 discussion

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 20:50:59 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200203280150.UAA09563@markbaker.ca>
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
I don't think I have any more to add to this discussion at this point.
It's the same old issue that we've never come to an agreement on.

So, what I can extract from this discussion is this;

- everybody likes the resolution to issue 12

- I like the current state tables in our HTTP binding, specifically (of the latest editor's draft), as it reflects my view
that a fault can only be processed as a fault when received with a 4xx
or 5xx response code, i.e. FaultHint is never set on a 2xx (hmm, it's
still only set on 500, not 4xx).

- Noah and Chris appear to want to change to say that if a
fault is received on a 2xx, then FaultHint would be set to true.

Does that capture the current state of things?

Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@planetfred.com
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Wednesday, 27 March 2002 20:45:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:11:48 UTC