Re: [ws-rx] proposal to address issue 140

[Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>]

If I understand it correctly, Bob is uncomfortable with the table saying 
'unspecified' for both 'Action upon generation' and 'Action upon receipt'.

-Anish
--

Doug Davis wrote:
> 
> I don't understand what is not clear with that fault.
> -Doug
> 
> 
> 
> *"Patil, Sanjay" <sanjay.patil@sap.com>*
> 
> 07/27/2006 01:10 PM
> 
> 	
> To
> 	"Bob Freund-Hitachi" <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>, "[WS-RX]" 
> <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	RE: [ws-rx] proposal to address issue 140
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Hi Bob/Anish, thanks for producing the proposal.
>  
> Can the proponents of the MakeConnection solution (or any body else for 
> that matter) suggest text for elucidating the Unsupported Selection fault?
>  
> - Sanj
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Bob Freund-Hitachi [mailto:bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com] *
> Sent:* Thursday, Jul 27, 2006 2:59 AM*
> To:* [WS-RX]*
> Subject:* [ws-rx] proposal to address issue 140
> 
> Anish has been kind enough to prepare the attached draft proposal to 
> address issue 140.
>  
> While preparing this draft, some additional points were raised which we 
> enumerate below:
>  
> Sequence Terminated Fault:
> There is no text that details under what conditions a sequence 
> terminated fault might be raised other than mention of a vague “protocol 
> error”.
> One way to address this is to list some or all of the conditions in 
> section 4, however it is more concise to represent these in the state 
> tables of appendix D were normative.
>  
> Unsupported Selection
> This fault description deserves elucidation
>  
> Thanks
> -bob