- From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 14:43:56 -0000
- To: "'Noah Mendelsohn'" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Hi Noah, > Stuart Williams suggests: > > >> The difference may not be so strong, given that Jacek [16] is open to > >> the deserialisation process being lazy, avoiding the need to > >> resolve/dereference references that are not actually required by the > >> computation at the local SOAP node. > >> > >> There may be a difference between Noah and Jacek on whether a SOAP > >> Fault *MUST* be generated in the event that href > >> resolution/dereferencing during deserialisation (lazy or otherwise) is > >> actually made and fails. > > > How can an external observer distinguish these two cases? On the whole I'm inclined to agree... there is perhaps a question of which black boxes an external observer looking at (some , but not all, failures to resolve/dereference an href may result in externally visible activity)... but that does feel like splitting hairs. > Either can occur due to conditions known only within the processing node. Agreed. > In one > case, I don't dereference because I was lazy and didn't try. In the > other case, I try, but there's a glitch in my network layer and I > can't make the connection. You worry that Jacek would REQUIRE that I > fault only in the latter case, but how could you tell? I might always > claim: "gee, actually, I never even tried to get at it." 'Worry' is probably not the right verb. I was trying to pinpoint the difference in the positions that you and Jacek seem to hold. Jacek seems to be of the opinion that if an attempt to resolve/dereference (and those I think are two different things) an href *actually* occurs and fails a fault MUST be generated. You (and Henrik) seem to of the the opinion that in such circumstances a fault MAY be generated. I think that this is the only point of difference preventing closure of this issue. > > I think I'm still happiest with MAY fault. > I believe that that has been clear throughtout, and FWIW I too am happiest with MAY, in part because there may be a significant lapse of time between the arrival of a message and the dereferencing of any URI it might contain. In such circumstances I think it would be quite difficult to prescribe quite what to do with any generated faults... and on the topic of faults since we generally only require that they be generated, the external observer test also applies. How would an external observer know that a fault had indeed been generated? :-) > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Noah Mendelsohn Voice: > 1-617-693-4036 > Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Regards Stuart
Received on Thursday, 3 January 2002 10:01:25 UTC