- From: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 11:15:32 -0500
- To: XMLP Dist App <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
- Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
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.
Received on Tuesday, 11 January 2005 16:15:34 UTC