RE: WSDL 2.0 Fault Binding [Plus two Questions]

Thank you for these comments.

 

The Working Group tracked these issues as CR092 [1] and CR093 [2].

 

You are right that a SOAP fault can contain multiple detail entries, or may
not be namespace qualified, but the WG did not want to complicate the
language by adding facilities to describe these rather rare cases.  The
latest draft lists these items as among the SOAP 1.2 allowed constructs that
the WSDL 2.0 SOAP 1.2 binding does not support [3].

 

Unless you let us know otherwise within 2 weeks, we will assume you agree
with the resolution of this issue.

 

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR092  

[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/cr-issues/issues.html#CR093  

[3]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ws/desc/wsdl20/wsdl20-adjuncts.html
?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#soap12-binding 

 

Jonathan Marsh -  <http://www.wso2.com> http://www.wso2.com -
<http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com> http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com

 

  _____  

From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Ramkumar Menon
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 7:07 PM
To: chinthaka@wso2.com
Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: Re: WSDL 2.0 Fault Binding [Plus two Questions]

 

Hi Eran,

 

My reply inline.
 

All Gurus, please see my related question too inline.

 

rgds,

Ram
 

On 11/9/06, Eran Chinthaka <chinthaka@wso2.com> wrote:


Hi,

I have a primitive question on SOAP binding of faults :)

Assume a fault is defined in an operation, and let's assume the fault is 
referring to the element foo in the types section. When a fault occurs
how would be the SOAP message looks like? Where will this Foo element go?

 

SOAP 1.2 states that all application defined elements that give more detail
on the error shd go  as "Detail Entries" into the "Detail" element
information item within the Fault element info item. The specification also
clearly says - "When generating a fault, SOAP senders MUST NOT include
additional element information items in the SOAP Body . A message whose Body
contains a Fault plus additional element information items has no
SOAP-defined semantics." 

Gurus, two questions here.

1) [Section 5.4.5 of SOAP 1.2 Part 1] SOAP 1.2 states the following - "All
child element information items of the Detail element information item are
called detail entries ". 

This means that the "Detail" element information item  can have multiple
detail entries. Does that mean that the user shd be able to define multiple
element info items while describing a Fault in a WSDL Document, or cd the
child elements of a fault element in the WSDL be directly copied under the
<Detail> element in a SOAP Fault EII ? 

 

2)  [Section 5.4.5.1 of SOAP 1.2 Part 1] states that "Each detail entry MAY
have a [namespace name] property which has a value, that is the name of the
element MAY be namespace qualified." This means that the detail entries may
alternatively come from "null/No Namespace". How wd a user be able to model
this in a WSDL description ? 

 


 

>From my little WSDL 1.1 knowledge, Foo element comes under Detail
element, when it is a SOAP 1.2 fault. Is this the same for WSDL 2.0?

 

Usage of WSDL 2.0 or 1.1 should not affect the place where application
defined elements should go into a SOAP Fault Message, since this is governed
by SOAP 1.2 specification.


 

Where should this be defined? I can not find details on this in any of
the docs of the spec. Seems I am missing something some where :( 

The spec mentions that one can specify about Code and Subcode to be used
inside the binding element. But there is no mentioning anywhere about
the above case.

If you want me to more clear on this, please look at the GreatH wsdl 
(http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb//2002/ws/desc/test-suite/documents/good/GreatH-1G/
<http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/ws/desc/test-suite/documents/good/GreatH-1G/>
).
When the server throws an InvalidDataFault, how will the SOAP message 
coming to the client from it. What should it contain?

I presume the fault should be bound to Detail element, but like to have
a confirmation on this.


Thanks,
Chinthaka




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- 
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFUiMLjON2uBzUhh8RAqECAJ0T1vEJ5jMRulzLD4rNhphfnGGiqACgj+eV
nbbuYkgVkc4ieqK0KMzBK9s=
=BdAg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----







-- 
Shift to the left, shift to the right!
Pop up, push down, byte, byte, byte!

-Ramkumar Menon
A typical Macroprocessor