Re: [wsbpel] new issue - clarification on whether the QName of afault needs to be unique across all portTypes and operations

[Prasad Yendluri <pyendluri@webmethods.com>]

Thomas,

The whole QName is the faultName in the WS-BPEL domain including the 
<catch> block.
If you need the WSDL faultName, then based on the potyType and operation 
names you can extract the correct name.

Regards,
Prasad


Thomas Schulze wrote:

>Hi Prasad,
>
>in case this portType contains a fault and you like to reference it in
><catch> according to your proposal, the faultName QName would look like
>this:
>
>      targetNamespace:My.Port.Type.My.Operation.faultName
>
>Right? The portType "My" containing the operation "Port" defining the
>faultName "Type.My.Operation.faultName" is not meant here.
>
>Best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
>       Thomas Schulze
>
>IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH, IBM Lab Boeblingen
>WSS - Business Process Solutions - BPC Development 2
>Schoenaicher Strasse 220, 71032 Boeblingen, Kst. 3056, Geb. 7103-02, Raum
>0006
>Phone: +49-7031-16-3094 (T/L: *120-3094); E-Mail: ThomasSchulze@de.ibm.com
>
>
>                                                                           
>             Prasad Yendluri                                               
>             <pyendluri@webmet                                             
>             hods.com>                                                  To 
>                                       Thomas Schulze/Germany/IBM@IBMDE    
>             24.07.2006 16:14                                           cc 
>                                       alex.yiu@oracle.com,                
>                                       Ronald.Ten-Hove@Sun.COM,            
>                                       wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org         
>                                                                   Subject 
>                                       Re: [wsbpel] new issue -            
>                                       clarification on whether the QName  
>                                       of a fault needs to be unique       
>                                       across all portTypes and operations 
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>
>
>
>
>Hi Thomas,
>
>I do not see a problem. Can you please explain why you think there would be
>a problem?
>
>Regards,
>Prasad
>
>Thomas Schulze wrote:
>      Hi Prasad,
>
>      a portType definition like the following would lead to problems,
>      IMHO:
>
>          <portType name="My.Port.Type">
>              <operation name="My.Operation">
>                  ...
>              </operation>
>          </portType>
>
>      Best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
>             Thomas Schulze
>
>
>
>
>                   Prasad Yendluri
>
>                   <pyendluri@webmet
>
>                   hods.com>
>      To
>                                             Thomas
>      Schulze/Germany/IBM@IBMDE
>                   24.07.2006 15:53
>      cc
>                                             alex.yiu@oracle.com,
>
>                                             Ronald.Ten-Hove@Sun.COM,
>
>                                             wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>
>      Subject
>                                             Re: [wsbpel] new issue -
>
>                                             clarification on whether the
>      QName
>                                             of a fault needs to be unique
>
>                                             across all portTypes and
>      operations
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>      Hi Thomas,
>
>      Why do we need such a limitation?  The local part is just an NCName
>      (i.e. the LocalPart of the QName).
>
>      Regards,
>      Prasad
>
>      Thomas Schulze wrote:
>
>
>            Hi Prasad,
>
>            so the only *new* limitation with this proposal would be that
>            portTypes
>
>      and
>
>            operatins must not contain the "." character when used with
>            BPEL. Right?
>
>            Best regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
>
>                  Thomas Schulze
>
>
>  
>