RE: AJAX vs. Xforms

Jasper,

Well...I don't think there is a hard and fast rule here. Trying to add a
customer that already exists could be a read as a client error (they
shouldn't do it) or a server error (we won't let you do it). But either way,
5xx errors (at least at the SOAP level) are *not* just about the server
going down for maintenance...and how could it tell anyone? ;)

Anyway, the main point is it is currently defined, XForms would ignore the
XML returned in the SOAP message for any error returned, *including* 4xx
ones. Obviously a big problem, since SOAP over HTTP defines that an XML
payload will be present for nearly all return codes.

Regards,

Mark


-----Original Message-----
From: www-forms-request@w3.org [mailto:www-forms-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Jasper Bryant-Greene
Sent: 26 October 2005 19:08
To: Mark Birbeck
Cc: 'Erik Bruchez'; www-forms@w3.org
Subject: RE: AJAX vs. Xforms


On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 14:29 +0100, Mark Birbeck wrote:
> The problem my proposal attempts to solve is related to Daniel's but comes
> at it from the other side; in SOAP over HTTP, you can get a 500 code
> indicating that there was an error, but you can still get valid XML to
tell
> you about the error. SO you might get "Customer already exists" when you
try
> to add a new customer. I would have thought that Daniel's server would
> ideally be doing something like that (which I think he does mention as a
way
> to go).

Wouldn't it make more sense to send a 4xx error in that example, since
the fault is with something the client did (trying to add a customer
that already exists) rather than something the server did (e.g. going
down for maintenance)?

-- 
Jasper Bryant-Greene
General Manager
Album Limited

e: jasper@album.co.nz
w: http://www.album.co.nz/
p: 0800 4 ALBUM (0800 425 286) or +64 21 232 3303
a: PO Box 579, Christchurch 8015, New Zealand

Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2005 20:47:51 UTC