cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrea Smyth <>
Subject Re: Identification of Partial Responses
Date Tue, 09 Jan 2007 11:23:32 GMT
Glynn, Eoghan wrote:

>OK, back to the drawing board on this one :(
>A quick google on this question suggests that, notwithstanding some
>confusion, an empty SOAP body is actually kosher in certain
>circumstances ... see for example [1].
>So off the top of my head, I think we'd have to do something like the
>following to make the partial/full response distinction more
>1. Stop sending the wsa:RelatesTo in the partial response (this is
>potentially misleading in any case)
>2. Set something like a Message.IS_RESPONSE property to false in the
>WS-A layer if the wsa:RelatesTo header is not present
>3. Replace the ClientImpl.isPartialResponse() logic with
>Checking via Boolean.FALSE.equals() would ensure that the ClientImpl
>logic would be valid even if WS-A layer was absent (in which case the
>IS_RESPONSE property would be null, but we can assume that a partial
>response would never be received, as this may only occur if WS-A headers
>were present in the corresponding request).

I was experimenting with  WS-A soap handler set such a property when
1. it is located on the client side 
2. direction fo processing is inbound
3. ReplyTo is
but the above is neater.
Just to make sure though, the  property should be set in the addressing 
soap handler, right?


>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Andrea Smyth [] 
>>Sent: 09 January 2007 09:58
>>Subject: Identification of Partial Responses
>>Further to the dicussions on the 
>>"JaxwsInterceptorRemoverInterceptor and RM" subject on the 
>>different ways to identify a partial response I came accross 
>>an example of application messages with empty soap bodies. 
>>This is in the 
>>system test, where the response to the putLastTradedPrice 
>>invocation is a soap message with an empty body.
>>Addressing is not involved.
>>First off, is the empty ssoap body OK and to be expected?
>>Secondly, if it is, what should I expect if this 
>>client-server setup uses addressing and non-anonymous 
>>ReplyTo? It seems we can distinguish the partial response 
>>from the real response not by checking for an empty body 
>>(regardless if this results in empty of no list content in the
>>message) but need to look also at the addressing headers ...
>>Any ideas?

View raw message