OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsbpel message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue - 170 - How to handle faultcode, faultstring,and faultactor


Yaron,

I have been aware of the fact that facultcode and so on are not
defined by WSDL, and hence hard to handle in the current BPEL specification.

My position, as stated in the original message, is as follows:
 >>  >> Even though those three elements don't appear in a WSDL definition,
 >>  >> they (especially the faultcode) convey information that is too
 >>  >> important just to ignore.

I agree with you that the issue is currently out of scope for BPEL.
The question is, as I see it, "Is it OK to keep the issue out of scope?"

In my opinion, both "yes" and "no" can be justifiable.
(I've listed the two alternatives in the original message.)

If we choose "yes", then adding a note to clarify/explain
would be useful in helping readers correctly understand the
specification.

If we choose "no", then we would need the rationale of expanding
the scope together with the concrete solution.

Yuzo Fujishima
NEC Corporation


Yaron Y. Goland wrote:
> First, faultcode, faultstring and faultactor are all defined by SOAP, 
> not WSDL. Since BPEL restricts itself to dealing with WSDL the value of 
> these elements is outside the scope of BPEL.
> 
> Second, the only reason there is an issue here is because the WSDL 1.1 
> specifications definition of a SOAP fault binding only provides for 
> binding to the SOAP fault details element and not the fault* elements. 
> However BPEL explicitly limits itself to WSDL portTypes and does not 
> address bindings. Therefore this issue is again out of scope for BPEL.
> 
> To paraphrase Satish, we aren't in the business of fixing WSDL. I would 
> that we were but it's clear from previous votes that we aren't.
> 
>     Yaron
> 
> 
> 
> Yuzo Fujishima wrote:
> 
>> Yaron,
>>
>> Correct me if I am wrong.
>>
>> A fault message type is defined via WSDL definitions/message.
>> The problem is that what is defined there is the type of the
>> content of the <detail> element, not the whole SOAP fault message.
>> Because a BPEL message variable is defined via WSDL definitions/message,
>> it can only contain the content of a <detail> element, not faultcode or
>> the likes.
>>
>> Below is an example quoted and editied from
>> http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/ws-tip-jaxrpc.html
>>
>> ---- WSDL ----
>>
>> <definitions ...>
>>    <types>
>>      <schema xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";>
>>        <element name="InsufficientFundFault">
>>          <complexType>
>>            <sequence>
>>              <element name="balance" type="xsd:int"/>
>>              <element name="requestedFund" type="xsd:int"/>
>>            </sequence>
>>          </complexType>
>>        </element>
>>      </schema>
>>    </types>
>>    ...
>>    <message name="InsufficientFundFaultMessage">
>>      <part name="fault" element="tns:InsufficientFundFault"/>
>>    </message>
>>
>>    <portType name="Bank">
>>      <operation name="withdraw">
>>        <input message="tns:withdrawRequest"/>
>>        <output message="tns:empty"/>
>>        <fault name="fault" message="tns:InsufficientFundFaultMessage"/>
>>      </operation>
>>    </portType>
>>    ...
>> </definitions>
>>
>> ---- SOAP Message ----
>>
>>    <soapenv:Envelope 
>> xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/";>
>>      <soapenv:Body>
>>        <soapenv:Fault>
>>          <faultcode >...</faultcode>
>>          <faultstring>...</faultstring>
>>          <detail>
>>            <InsufficientFundFault xmlns="http://example";>
>>              <balance>1000</balance>
>>              <requestedFund>2000</requestedFund>
>>            </InsufficientFundFault>
>>          </detail>
>>        </soapenv:Fault>
>>      </soapenv:Body>
>>    </soapenv:Envelope>
>>
>> Yuzo Fujishima
>> NEC Corporation
>>
>>
>> Yaron Y. Goland wrote:
>>  > These three values are all available as elements inside of the Fault
>>  > Message as defined by the SOAP 1.1 standard. Why would BPEL need to 
>> have
>>  > any direct support for them beyond the support we provide for
>>  > setting/getting any XML value in a message?
>>  >
>>  >     Yaron
>>  >
>>  > ws-bpel issues list editor wrote:
>>  >
>>  >> This issue has been added to the wsbpel issue list with a status of
>>  >> "received". The status will be changed to "open" if the TC accepts it
>>  >> as identifying a bug in the spec or decides it should be accepted
>>  >> specially. Otherwise it will be closed without further consideration
>>  >> (but will be marked as "Revisitable")
>>  >>
>>  >> The issues list is posted as a Technical Committee document to the
>>  >> OASIS WSBPEL TC pages
>>  >> <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel> on a regular
>>  >> basis. The current edition, as a TC document, is the most recent
>>  >> version of the document entitled ** in the "Issues" folder of the
>>  >> WSBPEL TC document list
>>  >> <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/documents.php> -
>>  >> the next posting as a TC document will include this issue. The list
>>  >> editor's working copy, which will normally include an issue when 
>> it is
>>  >> announced, is available at this constant URL
>>  >> <http://www.choreology.com/external/WS_BPEL_issues_list.html>.
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>     Issue - 170 - How to handle faultcode, faultstring, and 
>> faultactor
>>  >>
>>  >> *Status:* received
>>  >> *Date added:* 18 Oct 2004
>>  >> *Categories:* Syntax & semantics <#category_syntax_&_semantics>
>>  >> *Date submitted:* 15 October 2004
>>  >> *Submitter:* Yuzo Fujishima <mailto:fujishima@bc.jp.nec.com>
>>  >> *Champion:* Yuzo Fujishima <fujishima@bc.jp.nec.com>
>>  >> *Document:* WSBPEL Working Draft, September 8, 2004
>>  >> *Description:* In the current specification, there is no way to 
>> set or
>>  >> get faultcode, faultstring, and faultactor in sending, receiving,
>>  >> throwing, or catching a fault.
>>  >>
>>  >> Even though those three elements don't appear in a WSDL definition,
>>  >> they (especially the faultcode) convey information that is too
>>  >> important just to ignore.
>>  >> *Submitter's proposal:*
>>  >>
>>  >> I think we have to do either of the following:
>>  >>
>>  >>    1. Do not support faultcode, faultstring, and faultactor. Add a
>>  >> note to the
>>  >>       specification telling that those are not supported. Also add 
>> the
>>  >> rationale
>>  >>       and possibly recommended values of them to use by 
>> implementation in
>>  >>       sending fault.
>>  >>    2. Support faultcode, faultstring, and faultactor.
>>  >> One way to support faultcode, faultstring and faultactor is as 
>> follows:
>>  >>
>>  >> Add optional faultCodeVariable, faultStringVariable,
>>  >> faultActorVariable attributes to <catch>, <throw>, and <reply>. For a
>>  >> <catch>, the attributes specify the names of the variables to set the
>>  >> values to, while for the latter two, the variables to get the values
>>  >> from.
>>  >>
>>  >> The default values (not the variable names) are "soap:Server", "", ""
>>  >> for faultcode, faultstring, faultactor, respectively.
>>  >> *Changes:* 18 Oct 2004 - new issue
>>  >>
>>  >> 
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >> To comment on this issue (including whether it should be accepted),
>>  >> please follow-up to this announcement on the
>>  >> wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org list (replying to this message should
>>  >> automatically send your message to that list), or ensure the subject
>>  >> line as you send it *starts* "Issue - 170 - [anything]" or is a reply
>>  >> to such a message. If you want to formally propose a resolution to an
>>  >> open issue, please start the subject line "Issue - 170 - Proposed
>>  >> resolution", without any Re: or similar.
>>  >>
>>  >> To add a new issue, see the issues procedures document (but the
>>  >> address for new issue submission is the sender of this announcement).
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >> Choreology Anti virus scan completed
>>  >>
>>  >
>>  > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the 
>> roster of
>>  > the OASIS TC), go to
>>  > 
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php. 
>>
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster 
>> of the OASIS TC), go to 
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php. 
>>
>>
> 
> 



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]