- From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 18:40:58 +0200 (MEST)
- To: Glen Daniels <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
- cc: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Glen Daniels wrote: > > A data point: > >> As you mentionned that you know implementations using 202, do >> you know >> what is their behaviour when there is an unmet mustUnderstand? >> (sending back the mU fault instead of a 202, or is it >> completely hidden) > > Apache Axis (and I believe Axis2 as well) sends a MU fault instead of > the 202. Thanks Glen! This behaviour is more in sync with the ROR spirit, than just sending back a 202, so if we decide to settle on the use of 202 (and I think that it's where we are heading to), I propose to add this clarification on the mU fault: "If a mU fault has to be sent as part of the initial processing of the request, it should be sent back to the originator instead of using a HTTP 202 return code." -- Yves Lafon - W3C "Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras."
Received on Friday, 31 March 2006 16:41:54 UTC