Oops!

Jeff sent me a note regarding my article on the Basic Profile changes from 1.0 to 1.1. He correctly pointed out that I had mistakenly confused R2724 with R2714 text for BP1.1. The article should have stated that R2724 had only changed with regards to the term "envelope". For the record, the difference between BP1.0 and BP1.1 for R2724 is as follows:

Requirement	BP1.0	BP1.1
R2724	If an INSTANCE receives a message that is inconsistent with its WSDL description, it SHOULD generate a soap:Fault with a faultcode of "Client", unless a "MustUnderstand" or "VersionMismatch" fault is generated.	If an INSTANCE receives an envelope that is inconsistent with its WSDL description, it SHOULD generate a soap:Fault with a faultcode of "Client", unless a "MustUnderstand" or "VersionMismatch" fault is generated.

The incorrect entry for R2724 should be removed and R2724 should be added to the list of requirements that were amended to reflect the change in terminology regarding the use of the term "message" and "envelope" in the section titled "New Conformance Target" as follows:

Additionally, the following requirements were modified such that the term message was replaced with the term envelope to be consistent with the revised conformance targets that distinguish between the SOAP envelope and the HTTP message:

R2751, R2748, R1025, R1027, R1028, R1029, R2724.

Of course, now I need to figure out how to get a change made to a published article on IBM's developerWorks.

Thanks Jeff!