[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: on the need for a reopening an issue on soap fault with rm faultwhen no payload
Sunil has, in his emails on the subject The mails I've sent on this thread: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrm/200406/msg00085.html http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrm/200406/msg00108.html http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrm/200406/msg00110.html http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrm/200406/msg00115.html http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrm/200406/msg00117.html made the point that the sending rmp can intercept the rm fault and deliver the fault to the producer, without a soap fault. I think this is a valid implementation, but if the soap fault is signalled to the sending rmp it still extracts the wsrm:response from the header and can do the same thing it would do if the soap body is empty. I am sorry, I have read these mails three times, and I still do not understand the problem with the behaviour we have in the spec regarding sending the rmfault in a soap header with a soap fault when there is no payload to put in the soap body. Tom Rutt -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]