OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsrm message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [wsrm] proposed wording for bullet in 4.5

 I'm cataching up with email, so I apologize upfront if this issue is 
 discussed and/or resolved already.

Doug Bunting wrote:

> We have not previously discussed the second or third sentences of this 
> draft.  The above changes remove some duplicate text from the second 
> sentence, moves some into the first sentence and rewords the 
> remainder.  If the group prefers less editorial changes and limiting 
> the updates to the first sentence, I would suggest at least removing 
> an extraneous "then" from the second.  The new first sentence for this 
> alternative would be:
> "
> When the Response RM-Reply Pattern is in use and the message cannot
> be delivered to the Consumer, a
> SOAP Fault MUST be generated in addition to the RM Fault.
> "
 Is the above comment specific to Duplicate Elimination case or a 
generic failure (to deliver) case?
 If former, then there is NO RM fault for Duplicate messages. So the 
above should be better
 qualified as "in addition to the RM Fault if exists one".

 If it is the latter, why do we need to send *both* RM fault and SOAP 
Fault. The Sending RMP
 will convert/translate a RM Fault either as a SOAP Exception or a API 
specific exception.
 So we don't need both.

 If we have to say SOAP Fault is sent, don't we need better sub-codes 
for interoperability?


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]