- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 15:16:57 -0500 (EST)
- To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
- Cc: rayw@netscape.com (Ray Whitmer), chris.ferris@sun.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Ray Whitmer writes: > > >> Great, I can live with that. > > Terrific, thanks. Now let's see whether anyone else can :-). Sorry, but I can't. 8-( The more I think about it, the more this is an R803[1] issue. It is critical, for the chameleon use, that a HTTP intermediary participating in a chain of SOAP/HTTP intermediaries, have a consistent view of what the SOAP/HTTP processors understand to be success or failure. Because in the chameleon view, this is all happening, SOAP and HTTP, at the same layer in the stack. If I understood your suggestion correctly, you're saying that a receiving SOAP processor should treat a fault received over 200, even after acknowledging that it's broken, as a fault. Doing this would leave the HTTP intermediary out of sync with the SOAP/HTTP processors, as it has no knowledge of this SOAP-specific heuristic. This would violate R803. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlp-reqs/#z803 MB -- Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. mbaker@planetfred.com http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.planetfred.com
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2002 15:11:52 UTC