axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Fell <>
Subject Re: Default values for SOAPAction
Date Thu, 21 Jun 2001 01:56:05 GMT
SOAPAction: "" has a very defined meaning, and i'm not sure that
should be the default. I use SOAPAction: as the default (no quotes),
which is valid, and means something different to SOAPAction: ""


On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 15:07:37 -0700, in soap you wrote:

>At 02:34 PM 6/20/2001 -0400, Glen Daniels wrote:
>>Change that back. :)  SOAP 1.1 requires SOAPAction on ALL http soap traffic.
>Done.  It now will send SOAPAction: "" if there is no MC_HTTP_SOAPACTION.
>The receiving HTTPActionHandler will ignore SOAPAction: "" (rather than
>getting weird as previously).
>>HTTPActionHandler shouldn't be in your transport chain if you don't want to
>>do dispatch on SOAPAction.
>It's currently painful to set up two different transport chains for testing
>purposes.  I think the fix above (SOAPAction: "" == no-op) works OK to
>allow us to do body dispatch functional tests over HTTP.
>>> I have addressed this by:
>>>   - having the JWSHandler *always* set the service to 
>>> JWSProcessor if the
>>> URL ends in .jws
>>This is a little tricky, but I think I'm OK with it.
>>> It's easy:  just change <deploy> to <m:deploy xmlns:m="AdminService">,
>>> patch to look only at the local name, and it works.  I have
>>> verified this.  (And of course SOAPAction dispatching still 
>>> works, too.)
>>> What do we think?
>>This should absolutely be done.
>OK, I've done it :-)  Checkin soon.
>>I'd like to see a single AdminClient which picks a transport based on the
>>URL you pass in (default is
>Modulo the fact that some transports don't *use* URLs (I know I keep saying
>this :-)....
>Right now there is client.AdminClient, the base class.  There is also
>client.http.AdminClient which is *very short* (only about ten lines long),
>and samples.transport.tcp.AdminClient (ditto).  It'd be easy to make the
>base AdminClient have a URL constructor, but I'll leave that to you.  (My
>main priority right now is making sure all the functional tests work
>cleanly again, which includes being able to do deployment via TCP.)
>>> I patched this hackishly, but my question is: why is the 
>>> AxisFault string
>>> not getting character-escaped?  (i.e. why is it
>>> "<init>..." instead of
>>> ";init&gt;..."?)
>>It should be - we need to be better about this in general.  You want to take
>>this task?
>I don't know how to go about it, and I'm pretty sure I don't want to learn
>right now.  Is Axis under Bugzilla yet?  If not, how do we create a
>Bugzilla section for Axis?  It would definitely be useful for things
>exactly like this!

View raw message