Jacques Durand wrote:
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Rutt [mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 10:56 AM
> To: Jacques Durand
> Cc: WSRM (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [wsrm] issue with use of SOAP Faults
>
>
> >> Also, in case replypattern is something else: do we still need to use
> >> SOAP Faults? (I don't
> >> believe there is a point to it.)
> >
> >I do not think there is any text in the current document which implies
> >this. I agree, we will not send soap
> >faults for callback or poll response.
>
> The current text is ambiguous in that SOAP Faults were associated
> with Req-Resp ops, which can in turn be used with any reply pattern.
> While what we only want (and only can do), is to associate them with
> Response reply pattern. The rewording I proposed fixes that.
>
> > Jacques
>
Ooops, what happens when callback reply pattern is used with request
response operation and the message
is duplicate. In this case their is no information to put into the
reply to the original message. Perhaps sending
a soap fault for this condition is a proper thing to do. they would
get an ack for the duplicate in the
callback, but what would be returned in the http response to the
duplicate request.
> >
> >
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Tom Rutt email: ;
> Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt email: ;
Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
