Ya know, this was my initial reaction, prior to the FTF. However, at the
FTF John (and others) was quite convincing that JAX-RPC will explode into a
thousand flaming pieces (I think that's what they said, or it might have been a
plague of locusts...) if anything other than an empty message is returned,
so I guess we have to go along with them.
Apparently "empty message" for "success without any significant return
value" is part of the WS-I Basic Profile, too.
-----Original Message----- From: Luc Clément
[mailto:luc@iclement.net] Sent: Fri 02-Apr-04 11:58 To:
'John Colgrave'; uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org Cc:
Subject: RE: [uddi-spec] Status of JAX-RPC
work
John,
I reviewed the CR. I'm warming up to the idea of
making this change though I don't agree with your use of an empty message
being returned which is to be interpreted as "Success". If I understand
your proposal correctly what you intend to return is the
following:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"
?> <Envelope xmlns="http://schemas.xmlsoaporg.org/soap/envelope/">
<Body/> </Envelope>
This is umbiguous; why not simply
return a "uddi:result" element as follows:
<?xml version="1.0"
encoding="UTF-8" ?> <Envelope xmlns="http://schemas.xmlsoaporg.org/soap/envelope/">
<Body>
<uddi:result errno="0"
xmlns="urn:uddi-org:api_v3">
<errInfo errCode=“E_success"
/>
</uddi:result>
</Body> </Envelope>
This isn't any more work either on
the server or client. Taking this approach significantly improves
testability; the test folks would not be happy with <Body/>. This
approach also does not require inventing a new attribute -- it simply calls
for the reuse of an existing one that allows the response to be interpreted
unambiguously yet satisfies JAX-RPC's inability to map to Java an element
that is used as both an output and a fault.
Unless there are
precedents to interpreting an empty SOAP:body element as success, I ask
that you change the CR to use the uddi:result element instead of what you
proposed.
Luc
Clément Web:
www.iclement.net/luc Cell:
425.941.0150
-----Original Message----- From: John Colgrave [mailto:colgrave@hursley.ibm.com] Sent:
Tuesday, March 23, 2004 08:27 To:
uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [uddi-spec] Status of JAX-RPC
work
We said that we would revisit the JAX-RPC work I have been doing
in March.
As I feared, the fact that dispositionReport is used for both
normal success responses and all faults causes incompatibilities in the
code generated by different JAX-RPC 1.1 implementations.
I have
therefore submitted CR-046 which suggests restricting dispositionReport to
faults only.
I have a Technical Note ready describing the changes to
the schemas that are required, but there is no point in progressing it any
further unless CR-046 is accepted as the handling of responses and errors
affects every method/operation in the JAX-RPC client
interfaces.
John Colgrave IBM
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/uddi-spec/members/leave_workgro up.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/uddi-spec/members/leave_workgroup.php.
|