[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re:[Issues 3 & 4] -- possible unifying resolution
Issues 3 & 4 both refer to cases where one of the forms of GetProperties is requested for an element/property not currently present. The issues specifically question whether a fault vs. empty document is the proper response. Suppose that we add solve this as follows. First, by fiat, we declare that some namespace is reserved within properties document. This "administrative" namespace is used to return [dare I say it] meta-properties, information about the document or request. Second, we define the first "meta-property" as <wsrfa:ElementsNotReturned xmlns:wsrfa="that NS I mentioned above"/> This meta-property would contain the list of QNames of those elements which were requested by are not present in the document. Using such a mechanism allows a caller to validate their requested list against the returned message, which is [apparently, by virtue of our consideration of a fault in this case] easier than "diffing" the returned list against the one they sent. I think this treads a middle ground, yet allows the two issues to be resolved in a consistent manner. I'm not sure how to resolve the "it's not a fault" resolution of issue 3 with the "if I mispell things, I want to know" spirit of the proposed resolution of issue 4. As to issue 4, I'm not sure how to tell when to return empty vs. fault. This type of resolution solves both things in a consistent fashion. Alternatives certainly encouraged... /fred -- Fred Carter / AmberPoint, Inc. mailto:fred.carter@amberpoint.com tel:+1.510.433.6525 fax:+1.510.663.6301
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]