W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > June 2005

Re: content of fault detail

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 18:30:12 +0200
To: public-ws-addressing-comments@w3.org
Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Message-Id: <1117816212.2905.7.camel@Kalb>

Hi again,

as a followup to the original issue quoted below, after reading Anish's
proposal [1], I noted a further issue.

The problem is, SOAP (at least 1.2) says that header-related fault
details must be headers, not in fault detail. WS-Addressing faults are
arguably header-related, therefore the details should probably be
formulated as headers. See SOAP 1.2's NotUnderstood header [2].

Hope it helps,

Jacek

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Jun/0003.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/#soapnotunderstood


On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 17:26 +0200, Jacek Kopecky wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> as an LC comment for WS-Addressing, I'd like to note that in SOAP 1.2,
> fault detail (the element S:Detail) can only contain element children,
> which is apparently violated by sections 5.2 and 5.4 of WS-Addressing
> SOAP binding.
> 
> The sections say, respectively:
> 
> 5.2: [Detail] [Missing Property QName]
> 5.4: [Detail] [action]
> 
> The values (QName, anyURI) must be somehow enclosed in elements (or
> represented as elements, which is doable for the QName) to be compatible
> with SOAP 1.2 fault detail.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
>                    Jacek Kopecky
> 
>                    Ph.D. student researcher
>                    Digital Enterprise Research Institute
>                    University of Innsbruck
>                    http://www.deri.org/
> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 3 June 2005 16:30:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:05 GMT