W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > January 2005

Re: SOAP Detail Element Question

From: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 11:32:14 -0500
To: XMLP Dist App <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-id: <5A220E02-63EE-11D9-80B7-000A95BC8D92@Sun.COM>

Further to this it looks like my initial interpretation was in line  
with our resolution to LC issue 322[1]. I propose we modify "related to  
the SOAP Body" in the first sentence of 5.4.5 to read instead "related  
to the SOAP message" in errata.

Marc.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x322

On Jan 11, 2005, at 11:15 AM, Marc Hadley wrote:

>
> Section 5.4.5 of SOAP 1.2 part 1[1] includes the following two  
> sentences which seem to be in conflict with each other:
>
> - "The Detail element information item  is intended for carrying  
> application specific error information related to the SOAP Body."
> - "The presence of the  Detail element information item has no  
> significance as to which parts of the faulty SOAP message were  
> processed."
>
> I wonder if this is a carry-over from SOAP 1.1[2] which includes the  
> following:
>
> "The detail element is intended for carrying application specific  
> error information related to the Body element. It MUST be present if  
> the contents of the Body element could not be successfully processed.  
> It MUST NOT be used to carry information about error information  
> belonging to header entries. Detailed error information belonging to  
> header entries MUST be carried within header entries.
>
> The absence of the detail element in the Fault element indicates that  
> the fault is not related to processing of the Body element. This can  
> be used to distinguish whether the Body element was processed or not  
> in case of a fault situation."
>
> It looks to me like SOAP 1.2 overturns the prohibition about using the  
> fault detail to provide additional information about failures when  
> processing header blocks, but its not completely clear. Should we  
> remove "related to the SOAP Body" in the first quoted sentence or is  
> that restriction intended to be preserved from SOAP 1.1.
>
> I note that WS-Addressing[3] makes use of the Detail element for  
> several of the faults it defines that are related to processing of  
> WS-Addressing defined headers.
>
> Thanks,
> Marc.
>
> [1]  
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part1-20030624/ 
> #faultdetailelement
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTE-SOAP-20000508/#_Toc478383507
> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-ws-addr-soap-20041208/#_Toc77464328
>
> ---
> 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 Tuesday, 11 January 2005 16:32:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:19 GMT