Re: [Bug 8301] New: generating the PutDenied fault

Ram,

The approach in [2] seems right, but let get this clear:

  - The service implementation ignores attempted changes to "read- 
only" values, i.e. never faults.

- The service implementation MUST fault is it is not happy with a  
"read-write" value.

If the above is correct, the text in [2] is not quite there.


On 19 Jan 2010, at 12:24, Ram Jeyaraman wrote:

> Yes, the existing text [1] should be clarified to identify  
> situations in which the service might ignore the supplied elements/ 
> attribute values or generate a fault.
>
> How about [2]?
>
> Thanks.
>
> [1] Current text
>
> Replace from:
>
> The replacement representation could contain within it element or  
> attribute values that are different than their corresponding values  
> in the current representation. Such changes could affect elements or  
> attributes that, for whatever reason, the implementation does wish  
> to allow the client to change. An implementation MAY choose to  
> ignore such elements or attributes, or it MAY generate a  
> wst:PutDenied fault. See 5 Faults.
>
> [2] Proposed text
>
> The replacement representation could contain within it element or  
> attribute values that are different than their corresponding values  
> in the current representation. Such changes could affect read-only  
> elements and attributes, and read-write elements and attributes that  
> the implementation does not wish to allow the client to change. If  
> an implementation detects changes it does not allow, in the elements  
> or attributes in the presented representation, it MUST generate a  
> wst:PutDenied fault (See 5 Faults). If a replacement representation  
> contains read-only elements or attribute values that adhere to the  
> schema of the resource, an implementation MUST ignore such read-only  
> elements or attribute values.
>
> From: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org 
> ] On Behalf Of Doug Davis
> Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 8:52 AM
> To: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
> Subject: RE: [Bug 8301] New: generating the PutDenied fault
>
>
> hmm, when I read that paragraph I interpret it to say "a service is  
> free to ignore anything the client sends in and not tell the client  
> it ignored it".  Anyone else read it that way too?  I understand  
> that perhaps the original purpose of this is to allow for the  
> service to ignore read-only data that the client may have sent, but  
> if so then it seems we should call out those type of cases.  The  
> current wording (e.g "for whatever reason") seems to allow a service  
> to totally lie by ignoring all of the passed in data.
>
> thanks
> -Doug
> ______________________________________________________
> STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
> (919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
> The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.
>
>
> Ram Jeyaraman <Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com>
> Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
> 01/06/2010 11:42 AM
>
> To
> "public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
> cc
> Subject
> RE: [Bug 8301] New: generating the PutDenied fault
>
>
>
>
> +1
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org 
> ] On Behalf Of bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org
> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 7:24 PM
> To: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
> Subject: [Bug 8301] New: generating the PutDenied fault
>
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8301
>
>           Summary: generating the PutDenied fault
>           Product: WS-Resource Access
>           Version: PR
>          Platform: All
>        OS/Version: All
>            Status: NEW
>          Severity: normal
>          Priority: P2
>         Component: Transfer
>        AssignedTo: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
>        ReportedBy: gilbert.pilz@oracle.com
>         QAContact: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
>
>
> Section 3.2 "Put" contains the following paragraph:
>
> "The replacement representation could contain within it element or  
> attribute values that are different than their corresponding values  
> in the current representation. Such changes could affect elements or  
> attributes that, for whatever reason, the implementation does wish  
> to allow the client to change. An implementation MAY choose to  
> ignore such elements or attributes, or it MAY generate a  
> wst:PutDenied fault. See 5 Faults."
>
> Since the term "generate" is defined as "MUST perform some internal  
> logging and MAY transmit a fault", "MAY generate" is a contradictory  
> clause.
>
> Proposal: "The replacement representation could contain within it  
> element or attribute values that are different than their  
> corresponding values in the current representation. Such changes  
> could affect elements or attributes that, for whatever reason, the  
> implementation does wish to allow the client to change. An  
> implementation MAY choose to ignore such elements or attributes. If  
> an implementation does not ignore these elements or attributes, it  
> MUST generate a wst:PutDenied fault. See 5 Faults."
>
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
>
>

Take care:

     Dr. David Snelling < David . Snelling . UK . Fujitsu . com >
     Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited
     Hayes Park Central
     Hayes End Road
     Hayes, Middlesex  UB4 8FE
     Reg. No. 4153469

     +44-7590-293439 (Mobile)






______________________________________________________________________
                                        
 Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited
 Hayes Park Central, Hayes End Road, Hayes, Middlesex, UB4 8FE
 Registered No. 4153469
 
 This e-mail and any attachments are for the sole use of addressee(s) and
 may contain information which is privileged and confidential. Unauthorised
 use or copying for disclosure is strictly prohibited. The fact that this
 e-mail has been scanned by Trendmicro Interscan and McAfee Groupshield does
 not guarantee that it has not been intercepted or amended nor that it is
 virus-free.