Tom,
Why not simply add a sub-element by name FaultCode to SequenceNumberRange.
It will be of cardinality of minOccurs=0. If present, then that
range messages have
fault. If not, they are non-fault messages.
Schema change would be:
<xsd:complexType name="SequenceNumberRangeType">
<xsd:complexContent>
<xsd:extension base="wsrm:EmptyType">
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:element name="FaultCode" type="wsrm:FaultCodeEnum"
minOccurs="0"/>
</xsd:sequence>
<xsd:attribute name="from" type="xsd:unsignedLong"/>
<xsd:attribute name="to" type="xsd:unsignedLong"/>
</xsd:extension>
</xsd:complexContent>
</xsd:complexType>
Only change would be adding a sub-element. If desired, we can
change this to
an attribute also.
Message sample would be:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--Sample XML file generated by XMLSPY v2004 rel. 3 U (http://www.xmlspy.com)-->
<Response xmlns="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/wsrm/schema/1.1/SOAP1.1"
xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/wsrm/schema/1.1/SOAP1.1
C:\work\ws-reliability-2004-01-27.xsd" soap:mustUnderstand="1">
<RefToMessageIds groupId="http://www.altova.com">
<SequenceNumberRange from="4294967291" to="4294967295">
<FaultCode>wsrm:InvalidMessageHeader</FaultCode>
</SequenceNumberRange>
<SequenceNumberRange from="4294967296" to="4294967299">
<FaultCode>wsrm:InvalidMessageParameters</FaultCode>
</SequenceNumberRange>
</RefToMessageIds>
<RefToMessageIds groupId="http://www.oracle.com">
<SequenceNumberRange from="294967291" to="294967295"/>
<SequenceNumberRange from="294967296" to="294967297">
<FaultCode>wsrm:InvalidMessageId</FaultCode>
</SequenceNumberRange>
<SequenceNumberRange from="294967298" to="294967299"/>
</RefToMessageIds>
</Response>
I do realize that PollRequest also refers to the same SequenceNumberRange.
To solve this,
i) we can maintain both sets of SequenceNumberRange,
with different names,
and refer one with faults to response
and one without faults to poll-request.
ii) or use the same element and mention in the spec.
that poll-request should not
have the FaultCode sub-element.
-Sunil
Tom Rutt wrote:
I proposae that we resolve rel 108 and 115
with the following resolution:
a) accept the unified response schema (eliminating the fault element)
posted at:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/download.php/5496/ws-reliability-uniresponseOpt.xml
The following restrictions are to be applied:
1) for response reply pattern, only one ack or only one fault can be
reported in the response.
2) for callback reply pattern, acks may be batched, but only one fault
can be reported in the callback. (this is to use the underlying fault
mechanisms for timely repoting of fault conditions via callback).
3) for poll requests (on messages send using any reply patternt), both
acks and faults must be batched in the poll response.
Tom Rutt
--
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt
email: ;
Tel: +1 732 801 5744
Fax: +1 732 774 5133
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/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php.
