W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org > February 2006

Re: Action in 1133, 1134

From: Arun Gupta <Arun.Gupta@Sun.COM>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 11:56:26 -0800
To: paul.downey@bt.com
Cc: jmarsh@microsoft.com, public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org
Message-id: <43FB706A.7050909@sun.com>

Should the assertion be checking for:

    soap11:Envelope/soap11:Header/wsa:Action
      = 'http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/fault'

or

    soap11:Envelope/soap11:Header/wsa:Action
      = 'http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/soap/fault'

since we are really testing for SOAP WS-A fault ?

-Arun

paul.downey@bt.com wrote:
> I've changed the assertion (in my local copy) to: 
> 
>    soap11:Envelope/soap11:Header/wsa:Action
>      = 'http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/fault'
>  or
>    soap11:Envelope/soap11:Header/wsa:Action
>      = 'http://example.org/action/fault'
> 
>  and documented the actions on the main page 
>  (I'll checkin later this morning, UK).
> 
> We can always employ '1' as a last resort?
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ws-addressing-tests-request@w3.org on behalf of Jonathan Marsh
> Sent: Tue 2/21/2006 6:26 AM
> To: Arun Gupta; WS-Addressing Tests
> Subject: RE: Action in 1133, 1134
>  
> 
> Excellent point, related to CR22 which was resolved today, which
> strengthens the guidance for protocol authors to SHOULD define their own
> custom actions.  Application faults I think also SHOULD define their own
> custom actions.  However, SHOULD isn't MUST so we have some leeway:
> 
> Some candidates for solutions are:
> 1) manually override these results to pass, but that's not as good as...
> 2) remove that assertion in favor of one simply checking that the Action
> is there.
> 3) define a custom application-level fault action for purposes of the
> testsuite such as "http://example.org/action/fault", and change these
> testcases to use it.  Implementations would need to change too to
> generate this fault.  This probably assures they are capable of using
> faults other than the predefined addressing one, which is good, but that
> seems beyond testing the spec for CR purposes, which is bad.
> 
> #2 good enough?
> 
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: public-ws-addressing-tests-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-
>>addressing-tests-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Arun Gupta
>>Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 3:48 PM
>>To: WS-Addressing Tests
>>Subject: Action in 1133, 1134
>>
>>
>>test1133, 1134, 1233, 1234 has a check for:
>>
>>soap11:Envelope/soap11:Header/wsa:Action =
>>'http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/fault'
>>
>>AIU, this value is to be used for WS-Addressing faults only where as
> 
> all
> 
>>the tests above throw an application specific fault. I understand the
>>relevance of this check in test114XX and 124X.
>>
>>I can change my implementation to pass this test but would like to
>>understand if this is a valid check ?
>>
>>-Arun
>>--
>>got Web Services ?
>>Download Java Web Services Developer Pack from
>>http://java.sun.com/webservices
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
got Web Services ?
Download Java Web Services Developer Pack from
http://java.sun.com/webservices
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2006 19:55:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:29:01 UTC