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

Re: A minor question

From: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 16:45:46 -0500
To: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Cc: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>, public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Message-id: <d365e574b9aa457875906ff6c2305505@Sun.COM>

I'd think you could use that as an excuse for much more serious 
infractions than mere verbosity ;-).

On Mar 18, 2005, at 3:48 PM, Martin Gudgin wrote:

>
> Can I use jet-lag and crossing 21 time zones as an excuse for 
> verbosity?
>
> Gudge
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jonathan Marsh
>> Sent: 18 March 2005 12:44
>> To: Martin Gudgin; Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM
>> Cc: Mark Baker; David Hull; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
>> Subject: RE: A minor question
>>
>> Or, more simply and directly:
>>
>> /soap:Envelope/soap:Body[count(*)=1]/soap:Fault
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-
>>> addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Martin Gudgin
>>> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 6:50 AM
>>> To: Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM
>>> Cc: Mark Baker; David Hull; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
>>> Subject: RE: A minor question
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry, yes, my XPath was sloppy. It should be
>>>
>>> /soap:Envelope/soap:Body/soap:Fault[count(preceding-sibling::* |
>>> following-sibling::*)=0]
>>>
>>> Gudge
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM [mailto:Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM]
>>>> Sent: 18 March 2005 06:19
>>>> To: Martin Gudgin
>>>> Cc: Mark Baker; David Hull; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
>>>> Subject: Re: A minor question
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 17, 2005, at 6:07 PM, Martin Gudgin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> A fault is any message for which the following XPath expression
>>>>> evaluates to true;
>>>>>
>>>>> /soap:Envelope/soap:Body/soap:Fault
>>>>>
>>>>> See[1], specifically;
>>>>>
>>>>> "To be recognized as carrying SOAP error information, a SOAP
>>> message
>>>>> MUST contain a single SOAP Fault element information item
>>>> as the only
>>>>> child element information item of the SOAP Body"
>>>>>
>>>> Picky, but I don't think the XPath captures "the only child
>>>> EII of the
>>>> SOAP Body", e.g. the following satisfies the XPath but not
>>>> the complete
>>>> criteria:
>>>>
>>>> <soap:Envelope>
>>>>    <soap:Body>
>>>>      <foo:bar/>
>>>>      <soap:Fault>
>>>>      ...
>>>>      </soap:Fault>
>>>>    </soap:Body>
>>>> </soap:Envelope>
>>>>
>>>> Marc.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part1/#soapfault
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org]
>>>>>> Sent: 17 March 2005 14:56
>>>>>> To: Martin Gudgin
>>>>>> Cc: David Hull; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: A minor question
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 02:16:11PM -0800, Martin Gudgin wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've not seen an answer to this question, so here goes;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A fault is just a reply. So the relationship would be reply.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can
>>>>>>> tell it's a fault because SOAP defines a fault message very
>>>>>>> specifically.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, it doesn't.  But let's not go there. 8-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-
>>> app/2002Mar/0007.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
>>>> Web Technologies and Standards, Sun Microsystems.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>
>
---
Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
Web Technologies and Standards, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Friday, 18 March 2005 21:45:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:04 GMT