W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org > March 2006

RE: WSO2 -> Axis issues (PLEASE READ, SPEC/TEST ISSUES)

From: Mark Little <mark.little@jboss.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 11:36:30 -0600
Message-ID: <C2CDEFBECFC9A14892BCCFB4C95F486802C5BC0D@EX-201.mail.navisite.com>
To: "Glen Daniels" <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>
Cc: <public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org>
I agree that's not what the spec says now, but I thought from the minutes that there had been discussion around clarifying it. Apparently not. Did anyone take an AI on Monday to try to resolve this further?

Mark.


-----Original Message-----
From: Glen Daniels [mailto:gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com]
Sent: Wed 3/15/2006 11:14 AM
To: Mark Little
Cc: public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org
Subject: RE: WSO2 -> Axis issues (PLEASE READ, SPEC/TEST ISSUES)
 

Hi Mark: 

> Having caught up on my email backlog it seems that we need to 
> tighten up the specification in terms of what it says about 
> errors that occur during the processing of the WSA header. It 
> does appear from the discussion in the WG that the consensus 
> is that faults must be dealt with as though WSA was not being 
> used at all. I missed that part of the meeting on Monday, so 
> was there anything else said that isn't covered in the minutes?

I don't think that's quite correct.  IIRC, we simply clarified that if
there are any problems with the headers, you cannot set values for the
abstract properties associated with the particular bad headers.
Therefore if there is a duplicated <To> for instance, normal <FaultTo>
and <ReplyTo> processing would still occur (barring any problems with
those headers of course), and faults would be delivered to the <FaultTo>
EPR if present, and the <ReplyTo> EPR otherwise.  If there were a
duplicated <FaultTo> you wouldn't have a [fault endpoint] property, and
would therefore default to <ReplyTo> anyway.  That's my understanding.

I would certainly be fine from a design perspective to say that faults
doing WSA processing are treated as if WSA is not in effect, but that's
not what the spec says now.

--Glen
Received on Wednesday, 15 March 2006 17:40:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:54:42 UTC