RE: A minor question

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org] 
> Sent: 18 March 2005 06:24
> To: Martin Gudgin
> Cc: www-archive@w3.org
> Subject: Re: A minor question
> 
> (to www-archive)
> 
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 10:27:38PM -0800, Martin Gudgin wrote:
> > All messages for which the XPath I gave below evaluates to 
> true are SOAP
> > faults. 
> > All messages for which the XPath evaluates to false are not 
> SOAP faults.
> 
> I understand that position.  It's self-consistent, and also consistent
> with many toolkit implementations.  But it's also not in the spec, 

The following language is in the spec

"To be recognized as carrying SOAP error information, a SOAP message
MUST contain a single SOAP Fault element information item as the only
child element information item of the SOAP Body ."

which is what I drew my (sloppy) XPath from.

> and
> more importantly, inconsistent with the HTTP binding.

I don't know what the HTTP binding has to do with this discussion. 

> 
> > I don't know how to answer the question you ask about getLastFault
> > because I don't know what the message look like. Perhaps 
> you'd like to
> > provide me a schema fragment?
> 
> Let's keep it simple and say that the last fault message is 
> bit-for-bit
> identical with the fault that would be returned from 
> getLastFault if it
> succeeded.  In other words, the last fault was a fault with
> getLastFault.

I don't believe that's allowed per SOAP 1.2 Part 1. If you really want a
getLastFault then the returned fault information must be wrapped in some
other element (either in the body or a header).

Gudge

Received on Friday, 18 March 2005 14:53:50 UTC