W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > October 2003

Re: proposal for faults

From: Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 22:54:34 +0600
Message-ID: <01a401c38905$dd300760$72545ecb@lankabook2>
To: "Jeffrey Schlimmer" <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>

"Jeffrey Schlimmer" <jeffsch@windows.microsoft.com> writes:
> Would fault/messageReference resolve to
> interface/operation/{input,output}? Or would it resolve to something
> defined by interface/@pattern?

I'm confused .. let me try a full syntax example:

<interface name="foo">
  <operation name="this-is-irrelevant"
    <input messageReference="M1" headers=".." body=".."/>
    <input messageReference="M2" body=".."/>
    <output messageReference="M3" body=".."/>
    <output messageReference="M4" body=".."/>
    <fault messageReference="F1" details=".."/>
    <fault messageReference="F2" details=".."/>
    <fault messageReference="F3" details=".."/>

So, presumably the pattern @ http://../pattern1 has messages called 
M1..M4 and fault messages called F1..F3 that fly back or forth. The
value of operation/fault/@messageReference will be on of the names
F1..F3 given by the pattern definition and therefore the pattern
definition would indicate which way the message is flow (in or out). 

Thus, whether a fault is inbound or outbound is fully determined 
based on the messageReference the fault element indicates. 

Now, can you re-ask your question please? I didn't grok it at all.

Received on Thursday, 2 October 2003 12:55:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:54:44 UTC