Return-Path: 
 <axis-dev-return-33590-apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive=ws.apache.org@ws.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 75828 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2005 04:31:18 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 19 Mar 2005 04:31:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 33386 invoked by uid 500); 19 Mar 2005 04:03:17 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-ws-axis-dev-archive@ws.apache.org
Received: (qmail 33358 invoked by uid 500); 19 Mar 2005 04:03:16 -0000
Mailing-List: contact axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
list-help: <mailto:axis-dev-help@ws.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:axis-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:axis-dev@ws.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list axis-dev@ws.apache.org
Received: (qmail 33342 invoked by uid 99); 19 Mar 2005 04:03:16 -0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=10.0
	tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from mail.opensource.lk (HELO squid.cmb.ac.lk) (202.51.147.3)
  by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:03:14 -0800
Received: from eurocenter.lk (fw-ec.eurocenter.lk [203.115.14.178])
	by squid.cmb.ac.lk (8.12.9/8.12.9) with SMTP id j2J49dgQ025167
	for <axis-dev@ws.apache.org>; Sat, 19 Mar 2005 10:09:46 +0600 (LKT)
	(envelope-from chinthaka@opensource.lk)
Message-Id: <200503190409.j2J49dgQ025167@squid.cmb.ac.lk>
Reply-To: <chinthaka@opensource.lk>
From: "Eran Chinthaka" <chinthaka@opensource.lk>
To: <axis-dev@ws.apache.org>
Received: from no.name.available by eurocenter.lk
          via smtpd (for mail.opensource.lk [202.51.147.3]) with SMTP;
 19 Mar 2005 04:21:09 UT
Subject: RE: [Axis2]Doubt on Detail Element in SOAPFault
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 10:02:51 +0600
Organization: Lanka Software Foundation
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
In-Reply-To: <bf414ee6050318120279d2c4ab@mail.gmail.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Thread-Index: AcUr9lSGLajjJQSxTbufV+jhrhCTQQAQZBmQ
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new
X-Virus-Checked: Checked
X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

Ok. Is this what SOAPFault detail should be. (Remember current impl is still
SOAP 1.1 compliant only, not SOAP 1.2).

SOAPFault MAY have only on detail element. That detail element can have any
number of children. 

Is that ok ?

If that's the case, I just will have to provide a method to add detail
entries to detail element and change if (detailElement != null) block to
return detail element. 


-- Eran Chinthaka

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anne Thomas Manes [mailto:atmanes@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 2:02 AM
> To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [Axis2]Doubt on Detail Element in SOAPFault
> 
> The <detail> element should have one child element.(That element may
> have as many attributes and child elements as you like.) When you
> specify the fault message, it should have at most one part, and it
> should reference an element defined in your types section. Faults must
> be encoded using document/literal.
> 
> - Anne
> 
> 
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:47:47 +0530, Shahi, Ashutosh
> <Ashutosh.Shahi@ca.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Guys,
> >
> >             Looking at the SOAPFaultImpl class of the OM implementation
> > gives me the feeling that the fault can have only one detail entry kind
> of
> > information.  In the setDetailInformation method I see that each time we
> > create a new detailElement and add the passed detail node as child to
> it.
> > Also getDetailInformation assumes that detailElement has only one child
> as I
> > see it returning a single node instead of an iterator.
> >
> >
> >
> > The general structure in Axis 1.2 is that we have a Detail Node which
> can
> > have > 1 detail entry element. The SOAP spec says the same. Is it that
> we
> > are restricting the user to create only one detail entry element in OM
> or am
> > I missing something?
> >
> >
> >
> > Ashutosh
> >
> >