- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 17:49:27 -0700
- To: "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>
- Cc: "Martin Gudgin" <marting@develop.com>, "Christopher Ferris" <chris.ferris@sun.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
>I don't understand why making the fault a child of the >envelope instead >of the body breaks orthogonality with the envelope or changes the >processing model - could you elucidate further ? Currently the processing rules are identical for a SOAP message independent of the contents of the Body, be it a fault, a purchase order, an event notification or something else. If we make the fault special then we need a special processing model for that as compared to all other possible message types. If you on the other hand argued that we should get rid of body entirely then I think that would be a consistent model as well. However, that would lead us with the exact same problem of describing when a fault is a fault as compared to merely "data". This of course is the case for all possible message types - is a purchase order a purchase order if it is wrapped within something else, or is encrypted? >In the spec we don't say anything about the fault having to be >the first >child EII of the body, only that it must be a direct child and that >there should only be one fault EII. >We don't disallow other EIIs within the body along with a fault and we >don't say anything about processing the fault or any EIIs that may >accompany it. The April 11 snapshot has as part of the definition of a SOAP fault text that limits when a SOAP fault is truly a fault [1] and when it is merely "data" (I referred to this in my proposal): "To be recognized as carrying SOAP error information, a SOAP message MUST contain exactly one SOAP Fault as the only child element of the SOAP body. A SOAP fault element information item MAY appear within a SOAP header block, or as a descendant of a child element information item of the SOAP body; but, in such cases, the element has no SOAP-defined semantics." This of course is similar to what we say about "role" and "mU" attributes - they are only "active" when used in specific places. Henrik [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/2/04/11/soap12-part1-1.86.html#soapfault
Received on Sunday, 14 April 2002 20:49:50 UTC