The resolution proposed by
Alastair below, seems fine.
From: Ram Jeyaraman
[mailto:Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:50 PM
To: ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ws-tx] Issue 060 - WS-AT: Reference to fault-handling rules
This is identified as
WS-TX issue 060.
Please ensure follow-ups
have a subject line starting "Issue 060 - WS-AT: Reference to
fault-handling rules".
From: Alastair Green
[mailto:alastair.green@choreology.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 2:28 AM
To: ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ws-tx] NEW ISSUE -- WS-AT: Reference to fault-handling rules
Issue name -- WS-AT: Reference to fault-handling rules
PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL OR START A DISCUSSION THREAD UNTIL THE ISSUE
IS ASSIGNED A NUMBER.
The issues coordinators will notify the list when that has occurred.
Protocol: WS-AT
Artifact: spec
Draft:
WS-AT WD 0.5 uploaded
Link to the document referenced:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-tx/download.php/17325/wstx-wsat-1.1-spec-cd-01.pdf
Section and PDF line number
Section 6, ll.333 - 335
Issue type: Editorial
Related issues: None
Issue Description:
Text relating to resolution of Issue 030 does not make sense in this context.
Issue Details:
The phrase "...protocol fault handling rules defined for that
protocol" does not makes sense when the protocol concerned is this one,
WS-AT.
Proposed Resolution:
Amend text to say: '...protocol fault handling rules defined in Section 9
"Use of WS-Addressing Headers" of this specification.'