Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [soapbuilders] STK V3 interop tests including DIME endpoints

Expand Messages
  • Kirill Gavrylyuk
    Thanks Simon. ... You meant to say that this IS possible but only for SOAP messages that do not pass Binary based parameters? Like the output for
    Message 1 of 15 , Jul 16, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks Simon.
      > I did want these message to
      >be wrapped in a DIME message, but it doesn't appear that its possible
      >with the DIME/WSDL binding.

      You meant to say that this IS possible but only for SOAP messages that
      do not pass Binary based parameters? Like the output for
      echoAttachmentAsString that Bob mentioned.


      >3. The flat sequence of elements was intentional for EchoAttachments,
      >as I didn't want the WSDL to match what any toolit does by default.
      You reached the goal:) But I don't think of using wrapper element when
      serializing array as a proprietary decision, but rather as a reasonable
      interoperable approach.

      If you want to serialize a function call, it does make sense to use a
      wrapper and put 1 child element for each function parameter. The same
      with a structure - 1 direct child per field.

      It's a good test for proxy builders functionality, but not for the
      interop, since you don't write wsdls this way in the real life.

      What do you think?


      -----Original Message-----
      From: Simon Fell [mailto:ws@...]
      Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 7:49 PM
      To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] STK V3 interop tests including DIME
      endpoints

      Thanks Bob & Kirill for the feedback, I've updated the WSDL as follows
      1. dime-rpc.wsdl has a @location added for the soap-enc import
      2. I've removed dime:message from the bindings where content is
      returned inline within the soap message. I did want these message to
      be wrapped in a DIME message, but it doesn't appear that its possible
      with the DIME/WSDL binding.
      3. The flat sequence of elements was intentional for EchoAttachments,
      as I didn't want the WSDL to match what any toolit does by default.

      I'll try and get some PocketSOAP results together this week.

      Cheers
      Simon

      On Tue, 16 Jul 2002 12:04:05 -0700, in ws you wrote:

      >Yes, I'll send wire dumps later on today.
      >
      >Yes, but the same is true for EchoAttachmentAsBase64, as you
      >pointed out in an earlier message on this list, and your endpoint is
      >returning a plain SOAP response. At the moment I'm assuming
      >that the inclusion of the dime:message element in these cases
      >was an oversight by the author of the WSDL, since it's a departure
      >from earlier interop test message format. The same sort of problem
      >exists with the input message for EchoBase64AsAttachment.
      >
      >So do can we expect changes to the WSDL, or should the
      >implementations be changed to conform to the WSDL as it now
      >stands? Simon?
      >
      >RC
      >
      >> Thanks!
      >> Could you send me wire dumps for EchoAttachments?
      >>
      >> I think EchoAttachmentAsString is supposed to return DIME response (1
      >> SOAP record), since it has <dime:message.../> element in the output
      >> message in the binding [1]... Do you observe the same?
      >>
      >> [1] http://www.pocketsoap.com/interop/dime-doc.wsdl
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> -----Original Message-----
      >> From: Bob Cunnings [mailto:cunnings@...]
      >> Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 12:22 AM
      >> To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
      >> Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] STK V3 interop tests including DIME
      >> endpoints
      >>
      >> Hi,
      >>
      >> Sure enough, sending "href" helps.
      >>
      >> -- EchoAttachment - works now.
      >> -- EchoAttachmentAsBase64 - works now.
      >> -- EchoAttachments - no change, empty "Out" element, no secondary
      >> payloads.
      >> -- EchoAttachmentAsString - the response message is DIME packaged,
      >> rather
      >> than the expected plain SOAP response, otherwise ok.
      >>
      >> RC
      >>
      >>
      >> > Thanks a lot Bob!
      >> > > Group C - all ok except case where header is "understandable",
      >> MU="0",
      >> > > and actor is "unknown".
      >> > Group C - that's an error in the test header handler that I wrote,
      >> still
      >> > haven't fixed, forgot.
      >> >
      >> > For dime-doc.wsdl - I believe this is because we also look for the
      >> href
      >> > attribute in the request message - which is our issue, looking into
      >> it.
      >> > Do you send ref:location? Any chance you could try href? (just to
      make
      >> > sure that this is the only reason).
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > > -----Original Message-----
      >> > > From: Bob Cunnings [mailto:cunnings@...]
      >> > > Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 10:26 PM
      >> > > To: soapbuilders@yahoogroups.com
      >> > > Subject: Re: [soapbuilders] STK V3 interop tests including DIME
      >> > endpoints
      >> > >
      >> > > Hi,
      >> > >
      >> > > Results from testing with White Mesa client:
      >> > >
      >> > > -- Base group - all ok.
      >> > > -- Group B - all ok.
      >> > > -- Group C - all ok except case where header is "understandable",
      >> > MU="0",
      >> > > and actor is "unknown". A header is echoed in the response
      although
      >> > this
      >> > > is
      >> > > not expected since the request header wasn't targeted at the
      >> endpoint.
      >> > >
      >> > > DIME rpc -- all ok! (EchoUnrefAttachments not tested as it is not
      >> > > supported
      >> > > by the DIME/SOAP/RPC implementation here)
      >> > > DIME doc (expecting "href" attr per your announcement):
      >> > > -- EchoBase64AsAttachment, EchoUnrefAttachments - both ok.
      >> > > -- EchoAttachment, EchoAttachmentAsBase64, EchoAttachmentAsString
      -
      >> > fault
      >> > > message returned "...HRESULT=0x80070057: The parameter is
      >> incorrect."
      >> > > -- EchoAttachments - an response is received whose "Out" element
      has
      >> > no
      >> > > ref,
      >> > > and no attachment payload is present.
      >> > >
      >> > > I can send wire dumps if you need them.
      >> > >
      >> > > WM test client results updated on the Round 2 page.
      >> > > I've updated the Round 4 page with your DIME endpoint info.
      >> > >
      >> > > RC
      >> > >
      >> > > > Hi, all,
      >> > > > I updated the SOAP Toolkit V3 endpoints to use V3 RTM bits:
      >> > > >
      >> > > > Round II Base(same url):
      >> > http://mssoapinterop.org/stkV3/Interop.wsdl
      >> > > >
      >> > > > Round II GroupB(same url):
      >> > http://mssoapinterop.org/stkV3/InteropB.wsdl
      >> > > >
      >> > > > Round III tests, same urls, listed at
      >> > > > http://www.whitemesa.com/r3/interop3.html
      >> > > >
      >> > > > DIME endpoints for the new DIME specification:
      >> > > > RPC-ENC: http://mssoapinterop.org/stkV3/dime/dime-rpc.wsdl
      >> > > >
      >> > > > DOC-LIT: http://mssoapinterop.org/stkV3/dime/dime-doc.wsdl
      >> > > >
      >> > > > Known issue: DOC-LIT DIME service will emit href attribute
      instead
      >> > of
      >> > > > ref:location when serializing referenced attachments.
      >> > > >
      >> > > > I'll run clients against other's published endpoints shortly.
      >> Please
      >> > let
      >> > > > me know how your clients run against these.
      >> > > > Thanks
      >> > > >
      >> > > >
      >> > >
      >> > >
      >> > >
      >> > >
      >> > >
      >> > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      >> > >
      >> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
      >> > > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
      >> discuss
      >> > > implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay
      on-topic.
      >> > >
      >> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      >> > > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >> > >
      >> > >
      >> > >
      >> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      >> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >> > >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
      >> > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
      discuss
      >> implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.
      >> >
      >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      >> > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> -----------------------------------------------------------------
      >> This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss
      >> implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.
      >>
      >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      >> soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> -----------------------------------------------------------------
      >> This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss
      implementation and interope
      >rability issues. Please stay on-topic.
      >>
      >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      >> soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >-----------------------------------------------------------------
      >This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss
      implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.
      >
      >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      >soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >



      -----------------------------------------------------------------
      This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss
      implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.