RE: ACTION-191

Group,

Here is a potential resolution for Action-191:

Modify Section 2.2.3

[Definition: soapjms:targetService] (xsd:string)
• Used by the service implementation to dispatch the service request.
• optional in URI
• if specified MUST appear in the JMS message in the JMS property named SOAPJMS_targetService. [Definition: Use fault subcode missingTargetService if specified and SOAPJMS_targetService does not appear.]

[Definition: soapjms:soapAction] (xsd:anyURI)
• as with SOAP/HTTP
• optional in WSDL, optional in environment
• if specified MUST appear in the JMS message in the JMS property named SOAPJMS_soapAction.  [Definition: Use fault subcode missingSoapAction if specified and SOAPJMS_soapAction does not appear.] ??? Issues to discuss: What if soapAction is changed (i.e. dropped) in the environment?  Should this generate a fault?  What if the property is dropped and soapAction is required by the provider?  
• if using SOAP 1.2, and the contentType property has an action parameter, that parameter value MUST match this SOAPJMS_soapAction value.† [Definition: Use fault subcode mismatchedSoapAction if the SOAP 1.2 action does not match.†]


Modify Protocol-2009

(targetService) if specified MUST appear in the JMS message in the JMS property named SOAPJMS_targetService. Use fault subcode missingTargetService if specified and SOAPJMS_targetService does not appear.


Modify Protocol-2018 

(soapAction) if specified MUST appear in the JMS message in the JMS property named SOAPJMS_soapAction. Use fault subcode missingSoapAction if specified and SOAPJMS_soapAction does not appear.


- Derek

-----Original Message-----
From: Rokicki, Derek 
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 9:48 AM
To: public-soap-jms@w3.org
Subject: ACTION-191

Group,

Action-191 questions why we do not specify fault subcodes for required properties that are missing from the request message.  I am specifically concerned about soapjms:targetService and soapjms:soapAction.  The specification states that soapjms:targetService and soapjms:soapAction must be included in the message properties when specified.

The argument against this is that there may be use cases where the provider is unaware if these properties were specified (e.g. the provider is unaware of the WSDL used by the consumer).  However, there are many other use cases where the provider is aware of the WSDL and therefore aware that these properties are required.  In these use cases it is likely that a fault will be thrown by the provider.

Regards,
Derek