RE: SOAP 1.2 Specification and confusion around Subcode

Ed,

You asked two questions in your e-mail below.

1. Can the Value element ( when appearing as a child of SubCode ) be a
'faultCodeEnum' from an application specific namespace?

2. How do you specify in WSDL what the valid values are?

The answer to the first question is Yes, given that the type of the
Value element is xs:QName, the values can be from any namespace. You
could ( in WSDL via XML Schema ) restrict the type of soap:Fault and
specify what enumerated values are allowed.

The answer to the second question is really in the purview of the Web
Services Description Working Group, whose comments list I have cc'ed on
this e-mail.

Regards

Martin Gudgin
For the XML Protocol Working Group

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ed.Morassut@bmo.com [mailto:Ed.Morassut@bmo.com] 
> Sent: 02 October 2002 18:18
> To: xmlp-comments@w3.org
> Subject: SOAP 1.2 Specification and confusion around Subcode
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I read through the specifications and I have a question around Subcode
> 
> 
> 
> 5.4.1.3 SOAP Value element (with Subcode parent)
> 
> 
> The Value element information item has:
> 
> *     A [local name] of Value .
> *     A [namespace name] of http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope .
> 
> The type of the Value element information item is QName in 
> the " http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" namespace. The value 
> of this element is an application defined subcategory of the 
> value of the Value child element information item of the 
> Subcode element information item's parent element information 
> item (see 5.4.6 SOAP Fault Codes).
> 
> 
> NOTE. What is not clear here is whether you can make this 
> element information item a  faultCodeEnum from an application 
> specific namespace. A further problem is that Subcode appears 
> to be disconnected from WSDL implying a developer has no way 
> of understanding the domain values of this Enum because it is 
> not documented as part of the interface.
> 
> 
> Is this someting you folks have already thought through?  The 
> debate in our shop is that we should avoid Subcode and put 
> such meaning into the fault detail (especially being that the 
> current tooling doesn't yet support Subcode).  If we end up 
> putting such meaning into the detail we'll end up coupled to 
> non-standard detailed parsers in order to isolate an 
> equivalent of Subcode.  Am I missing something here?  Can we 
> make the Enum from an application specific namespace and how 
> do we connect to WSDL?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Monday, 28 October 2002 05:42:51 UTC