- From: Addison Phillips [wM] <aphillips@webmethods.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 08:53:44 -0700
- To: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@jtcsv.com>, <andrea.vine@Sun.COM>, "I18n WSTF" <public-i18n-ws@w3.org>
Yep. Those scenarios appear in our document already. Under separate cover I sent you a note about the hope of fixing things. Addison Addison P. Phillips Director, Globalization Architecture webMethods | Delivering Global Business Visibility http://www.webMethods.com Chair, W3C Internationalization (I18N) Working Group Chair, W3C-I18N-WG, Web Services Task Force http://www.w3.org/International Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Davis [mailto:mark.davis@jtcsv.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 7:07 AM > To: aphillips@webmethods.com; andrea.vine@Sun.COM; I18n WSTF > Subject: Re: 4.7.5 I-008: Locale Sensitive Formatted Data in SOAP Fault > Messages > > > Well, it is now clearer. But they really screwed up error > messages. That forces > all web services to be able to output every possible user's > locale. And aside > from globalization, you want to be able to 'chain' exceptions. > > Any hope of fixing the web services? > > Mark > __________________________________ > http://www.macchiato.com > ► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Addison Phillips [wM]" <aphillips@webmethods.com> > To: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@jtcsv.com>; <andrea.vine@Sun.COM>; > "I18n WSTF" > <public-i18n-ws@w3.org> > Sent: Mon, 2004 Apr 12 21:22 > Subject: RE: 4.7.5 I-008: Locale Sensitive Formatted Data in SOAP > Fault Messages > > > I agree in general, Mark, but that's not the design of Web Services. > > This is something we have been at pains to point out: Faults (the > Web Service > equivalent of a runtime error or exception) can only generate a > text message, > not a complex type (data structure) in the SOAP provided XML > structure. These > scenarios are our way of complaining about it (we corresponded about this > previously, I think). > > For example, a given service can have several "outbound" > messages, some of which > indicate success and some of which indicate an error of some kind > (such as input > out of range or record not found). These responses are under programmatic > control of the service, please note, and can follow the pattern > you describe in > JITXL. > > By contrast, a Fault is a runtime exception. It may be literally > and exception > thrown in the body of the service or it may be an error condition > detected in > the Provider (such as "service not found" or "malformed input"). As Andrea > points out, Faults are different from SOAP messages indicating an > error, because > they can contain only a Reason element (a text element containing > the human > readable message). > > In other words, the design of Web Services is such that all > Faults are resolved > to string where they occur at the level they occur. > > What you're describing is a service that ends normally and returns a > processing-controlled error. This can be done with Web Services > and we should > probably add a scenario showing it. > > However, abnormal ends such as a thrown exception or an error > detected at the > Provider (rather than service) level--that is, errors not under > control of the > service's normal processing--are forced to return a Fault and > these must be > resolved to a natural language string as shown in the example at > the level at > which they occur. The string must be marked with xml:lang (yay!), > but there is > no default message, data structuring, or language negotiation > provided. Hence > the scenarios including I-008 and I-022. > > Does that describe the problem more clearly? > > Addison P. Phillips > Director, Globalization Architecture > webMethods | Delivering Global Business Visibility > http://www.webMethods.com > Chair, W3C Internationalization (I18N) Working Group > Chair, W3C-I18N-WG, Web Services Task Force > http://www.w3.org/International > > Internationalization is an architecture. > It is not a feature. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: public-i18n-ws-request@w3.org > > [mailto:public-i18n-ws-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Mark Davis > > Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 7:11 PM > > To: andrea.vine@Sun.COM; I18n WSTF > > Subject: Re: 4.7.5 I-008: Locale Sensitive Formated Data in SOAP Fault > > Messages > > > > > > > > I disagree with this assessment. We all agree that the error > > message -- when > > presented to the reader -- should be localized. Thus the user > should see: > > > > > * "The date provided, 12 November 2201, was too late." > > > * "The argument 12345.678 was too large." > > > * "The argument 12345,678- was too small." > > > > However, *where* the localization should be done is not so > > simple. It should be > > closest point to the user where enough information is available > > to formulate the > > message. > > > > Thus Service A (where the error is generated) may not actually > > have any locale > > information available. It might then simply send back something like: > > > > "Use MessageFormat string associated with someFault, plus data > > (in unlocalized > > form, e.g. XMLSchema datatypes): > > > > ... > > <error>someFault</error> > > <date>2004-04-14</date> > > <numberOfPages>1400</numberOfPages> > > ... > > > > This message hops from Service to Service until it gets to one > > that knows (a) > > what the end recipient's locale is, and (b) what the > MessageFormat string > > associated with someFault for that locale is. > > > > For more info, see > > http://oss.software.ibm.com/cvs/icu/~checkout~/icuhtml/design/jit_ > > localization.html > > > > Mark > > __________________________________ > > http://www.macchiato.com > > ► शिष्यादिच्छेत्पराजयम् ◄ > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "A. Vine" <andrea.vine@Sun.COM> > > To: "I18n WSTF" <public-i18n-ws@w3.org> > > Sent: Mon, 2004 Apr 12 19:06 > > Subject: 4.7.5 I-008: Locale Sensitive Formated Data in SOAP > > Fault Messages > > > > > > > > > > All, > > > > > > I think that the best arrangement of I-008, fault messages, and > > I-022 would > > be: > > > > > > Move I-008 to be 4.3.3, or whatever it winds up being. Rename 4.3 to > > something > > > like "Fault Handling" or "Fault Message Handling". Reword and > > repunctuate > > 4.3.3 > > > slightly as follows - > > > > > > ------------------------- > > > > > > 4.3.3 I-008: Locale Sensitive Formatted Data in SOAP Fault Messages > > > > > > A service provider must substitute locale-sensitive data into > > text messages > > when > > > generating faults. > > > > > > Service A is defined on Provider B. A fault is generated during > > invocation, > > > returning a faultReason. In order to properly present values > inside the > > > faultReason message, the locale must be known and locale > > information must be > > > available. For example: > > > > > > * "The date provided, 12 November 2201, was too late." > > > * "The argument 12345.678 was too large." > > > * "The argument 12345,678- was too small." > > > > > > The provider should format substitutions in each message > > according to the > > > language and locale of the message, not according to the locale of the > > provider > > > or service. In the case of Language Neutral or Service > > Determined patterns, it > > > may not be possible to generate a message in the user's > > preferred language (or > > > the preference may not be available). In these cases, the > message should > > follow > > > the language preference of the provider or service host. > > > > > > For more information on locale related formatting, see I-022. > > > > > > -------------------------- > > > > > > My reasoning is this: People are going to look at fault > > messages separately > > > from SOAP messages, because they are often from different > > coding components > > with > > > different people working on them. So I don't want to merge the > > fault message > > > locale-based formatting with data formatting. But the data > > formatting example > > > has some additional information that they might want to take a > > look at to get > > a > > > better concept. > > > > > > Andrea > > > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 13 April 2004 11:59:37 UTC