[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Fwd: [legalxml-courtfiling] RE: ECF 4.0 web services SIPconformance issue with WS-I Basic Profile (0.60/3.50)
All,
I apologize for missing today's conference call. My plane was scheduled to arrive in time to attend, but then we got a rain delay and sat out on the tarmac.
I concur with the release 4.01.
Ron Bowmaster
Utah AOC/CITO
801.578.3872
>>> "Cabral, James E." <JCabral@mtgmc.com> 6/9/2009 11:19 AM >>>
ECF TC:
During the TC call today we decided to plan to release this update as a
4.01 bug fix release of the web services SIP by the end of the month.
The TC requests any implementers of the web services SIP to test with
the attached WSDL and report any additional issues to this list by June
23rd. Otherwise, we will move ahead with a vote to release the 4.01
version.
Thanks,
Jim Cabral
James E. Cabral Jr.
MTG Management Consultants, L.L.C.
(206) 442-5010
www.mtgmc.com
Helping our clients make a difference in the lives of the people they
serve.
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and
delete the material from any computer.
From: Cabral, James E.
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 4:12 PM
To: Eric Dimick Eastman
Cc: 'legalxml-courtfiling@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: ECF 4.0 web services SIP conformance issue with WS-I Basic
Profile
Eric,
I'm just happy to be getting this sort of feedback so that we can
(hopefully) improve the interoperability of the spec.
I'm CCing the TC and attaching the corrected WSDL again so that they
everyone is aware of this issue. We should talk about this at the next
TC meeting and decide how we want to handle it. At a minimum, this
would be errata to the 4.0 web services SIP but a bug-fix release (e.g.
4.01) is probably in order.
Thanks,
Jim Cabral
James E. Cabral Jr.
MTG Management Consultants, L.L.C.
(206) 442-5010
www.mtgmc.com
Helping our clients make a difference in the lives of the people they
serve.
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and
delete the material from any computer.
From: Eric Dimick Eastman [mailto:erice@doxpop.com]
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 4:07 PM
To: Cabral, James E.
Subject: Re: [legalxml-courtfiling] Ohio Judicial Conference
Jim,
Thanks for getting back to me. That WSDL looks a lot like my
work-around version. I'm sure that it will work for us. Our production
system is still based on 3.0, but I'll be working on 4.0 soon. I'll let
you know.
Too bad that it looks like a flaw in the 4.0 SIP, but the good news is
that I'm not crazy.
Assuming that this works out well, do you think it would be included in
a 4.0.1 version of the SIP? We claim that WS-I compliance is required
for ECF WS SIP 4.0 compliance so I assume that we would not want this
conflict out there.
Thanks again,
Eric
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Cabral, James E. <JCabral@mtgmc.com>
wrote:
Eric,
This looks like it is an issue of nonconformance of the ECF web services
SIP with Section 4.4.1 of the WS-I Basic Profile spec. While the WSDL
and SOAP specs clearly allow messages with multiple parts, Section 4.4.1
of the WS-I Basic Profile spec (
http://www.ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicProfile-1.1.html#Bindings_and_Parts)
includes these restrictions:
4.4.1 Bindings and Parts
There are various interpretations about how many wsdl:part elements are
permitted or required for document-literal and rpc-literal bindings and
how they must be defined.
R2201 A document-literal binding in a DESCRIPTION MUST, in each of its
soapbind:body element(s), have at most one part listed in the parts
attribute, if the parts attribute is specified.
R2209 A wsdl:binding in a DESCRIPTION SHOULD bind every wsdl:part of a
wsdl:message in the wsdl:portType to which it refers with a binding
extension element.
R2210 If a document-literal binding in a DESCRIPTION does not specify
the parts attribute on a soapbind:body element, the corresponding
abstract wsdl:message MUST define zero or one wsdl:parts.
...
For document-literal bindings, the Profile requires that at most one
part, abstractly defined with the element attribute, be serialized into
the soap:Body element.
To bring ECF into conformance with WS-I Basic Profile 1.1 , we need to
define new elements for the body of each of the WSDL messages that have
multiple input parameters, namely NotifyFilingReviewCompleteRequest,
RecordFilingRequest, and ReviewFilingRequest. I have tried this
approach in the attached WSDL file. Please try it out and let me know
if this works for you.
Sorry it took me a week to get back to you.
Thanks,
Jim Cabral
James E. Cabral Jr.
MTG Management Consultants, L.L.C.
(206) 442-5010
www.mtgmc.com
Helping our clients make a difference in the lives of the people they
serve.
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and
delete the material from any computer.
From: Eric Dimick Eastman [mailto:erice@doxpop.com]
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 4:27 PM
To: Cabral, James E.
Subject: Re: [legalxml-courtfiling] Ohio Judicial Conference
Jim,
Thanks for the presentation. It served as a great jumping off point.
I'm attaching the drawings I made in case they are any use to you.
Amateurish, I know, but I never claimed to be an artist. I know that
ServeFiling isn't required, but the Service MDE is fairly useless
without it. I added a "if you have one" caveat to the talk.
Also, I'm having a problem with the WSDL's for the webservices SIP.
About a year ago I noticed that I was getting an error when I tried to
implement the messages that have more than one part. I only needed the
CoreFilingMessage at the time, so I just commented out the other parts
and didn't think too much about it. Now we need to include a
PaymentMessage and I've put a fair amount of effort into it and I still
can't get it to work. I've read the SOAP spec and I believe that the
SOAP body needs to be one root XML element.
This is the section of the WSDL I'm having problems with. This example
is from version 4.0, but the same problem exists in 3.0 and 3.1:
<input name="ReviewFilingRequest">
<soap:body parts="CoreFilingMessage PaymentMessage" use="literal"/>
</input>
When I try this with Java's wsimport tool I get a message that goes
something like "More than one message part bound to SOAP body.
Skipping..."
The only work-around I've been able to complete is to create a
<ReviewFilingRequest> element to surround the CoreFilingMessage and the
Payment message and then redefing the message to have only one part.
I have one more straw to grasp at which is changing the "use" attribute
from "literal" to "encoded". I don't have much hope for it and it would
also require a change to the WSDL.
I wasn't a part of any discussions about how to construct the SOAP
bindings. I was hoping you might have some insights or at least know
whom to ask.
Any thoughts?
Thanks again,
Eric
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Cabral, James E. <JCabral@mtgmc.com>
wrote:
Eric,
Here's our presentation from the E-Courts conference, it's a quick start
to ECF which isn't exactly your topic but you may be able to use some of
the material. Let me know if there is something else I can help you
with.
Thanks,
Jim Cabral
James E. Cabral Jr.
MTG Management Consultants, L.L.C.
(206) 442-5010
www.mtgmc.com
Helping our clients make a difference in the lives of the people they
serve.
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and
delete the material from any computer.
From: Eric Dimick Eastman [mailto:erice@doxpop.com]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 2:23 PM
To: ECF TC
Subject: [legalxml-courtfiling] Ohio Judicial Conference
Hello ECF TC (especially outreach folks),
We will be attending the Ohio Judicial Conference Court Technology
Conference
<http://www.ohiojudges.org/index.cfm?PageID=456DEB1B-19B9-FE20-6CB67E68D
AB9517C> on May 29th. I just became aware today that I'm signed up for
a 1/2 hour speaking slot and I thought that "Standards-Based Electronic
Filing" might be a fun topic. I'm trying to fit preparing for this into
an already busy schedule.
So a couple questions:
1) Do we have any content to serve as a jumping off point? Any graphics
or diagrams for visual appeal? Any interest in collaborating from other
folks who will be giving presentations soon?
2) Any issue with handing out copies of the Quick Start Guide?
Thanks,
Eric
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Eastman
erice@doxpop.com
http://www.doxpop.com
765.965.7363 x104
765.962.9788 (Fax)
Doxpop - Public Records at Your Fingertips.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Eastman
erice@doxpop.com
http://www.doxpop.com
765.965.7363 x104
765.962.9788 (Fax)
Doxpop - Public Records at Your Fingertips.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Eastman
erice@doxpop.com
http://www.doxpop.com
765.965.7363 x104
765.962.9788 (Fax)
Doxpop - Public Records at Your Fingertips.
ECF-4.0-WebServicesProfile-Definitions.wsdl
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]