- From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 12:08:27 -0700
- To: "Marc Hadley" <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>, "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>
- Cc: "David Hull" <dmh@tibco.com>, <public-ws-async-tf@w3.org>
Marc, Let's assume that a 4/5xx indicates a possible SOAP fault then. The sender may generate something to put in a body or not, the receiver won't know what it is until it gets it. I don't think there's any way that we could write up which error codes will or won't have a body, so we just have to live with it. The receiver of a 4/5xx has to wait to find out whether there is a body or not. C'est la vie. If they got a SOAP fault, they can pass it up. If it's not a SOAP fault, then there may be some other way of passing an error back up, but it's not in the SOAP MEP. My point was that in-optional-fault is better than in-optional-out, which you haven't responded to. We've clarified expectations on in-optional-fault, but I can't tell which mep proposal you support. Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Marc Hadley [mailto:Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM] > Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 11:53 AM > To: David Orchard > Cc: David Hull; public-ws-async-tf@w3.org > Subject: Re: MEPS Part II: SOAP > > On Apr 8, 2005, at 2:11 PM, David Orchard wrote: > > > I think this is good work, where you are going. It certain is similar > > to the work that I published. There are some unanswered questions > > though. > > > > 1. Should there be an in-optional-out or in-optional-fault or both > > soap meps? I'm leaning towards in-optional-fault because I think that > > the SOAP MEP layer needs to be self-describing wrt responses, and I > > don't see any value in an in-optional-out where the out could be not a > > fault. The logic for HTTP: > > > > - One-way: http response codes ignored, sender/receiver know that > > response body can't be generated. > > > > - Request-response: http response codes relevant: 2xx indicates a SOAP > > BODY response, 4/5xx indicates SOAP FAULT response, 404 indicates no > > SOAP BODY or FAULT response. Senders and receivers know whether to > > wait or not depending on the status code. > > > > - In-optional-fault: http response codes relevant, FAULT only in 4/5xx > > (excluding 404). Sender and receiver know exactly what can be sent. > > > I don't buy that 4/5xx indicates a SOAP Fault response. It *may* > indicate that but it might equally indicate that something went wrong > in my HTTP infrastructure *before* any SOAP processing occurred and the > entity body could include some HTML error message. >
Received on Friday, 8 April 2005 19:08:33 UTC