W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org > October 2009

[Bug 7911] mismatching action and body wrapper

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:45:15 +0000
To: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1My3EB-0000vd-Q4@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7911





--- Comment #4 from Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>  2009-10-14 12:45:15 ---
But Yves, you're focusing on just one particular "mismatch" when there
are any number of possible "mismatches".  What if the actionURI doesn't
match what the spec says it should be? What if the schema of the body
doesn't match the xsd in the wsdl?  What if the Dialect URI isn't
a URI? What if the dateTime (in eventing) has had characters in it?
What if the HTTP SOAPAction header doesn't match?  What if, in response
to a T.Get() the server sends back a T.PutResponse()?

You said:
we have to define what happens when something bad happens because we 
defined the same thing in two different places.

Why? What's special about "two different places"?  Does this imply
we don't need to define what happens when something bad happens in 
cases where we don't duplicate info?  I doubt it. 

There are a ton of things that could be bad about the incoming 
message and they seem to fall into the category of "you didn't do what the
spec told you to do", because the spec is very clear about what is 
supposed to be on the wire.  I'm missing why this one "mismatch" is special 
and needs a new fault when the general soap Sender fault would seem
to already cover it.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2009 12:45:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 14 October 2009 12:45:19 GMT