> Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 20:38:42 +0100
> From: "Matthew J. Dovey" <[log in to unmask]>
>
> > Any suggestions on how I should handle this? We've got no
> > diagnostics for this kind of thing because we expected that the
> > WSDL would keep it from happening.
>
> We've got no diagnostics for this sort of thing because it is a
> protocol level error rather than an SRW/U level error.
... which is a mistake, since SRW doesn't mandate a protocol.
> The SRU equivalent to a SOAP fault is a http error code so I think
> the answer should be return a http 400 erro (Bad request)
And what about when this happens in a message sent over the SMTP
transport? No, it needs to be recognised at the SRW level.
> Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 15:43:49 -0400
> From: "LeVan,Ralph" <[log in to unmask]>
>
> We do have a diagnostic 6: Unsupported Parameter Value with a detail
> of the name of the parameter. I think I'll throw that.
Sounds right to me.
_/|_ _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "Sure it stinks, but only a little stink; not the horrendous
stench you might find in some other alleged ``science''
reports" -- Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. in a mellow mood
--
Listen to free demos of soundtrack music for film, TV and radio
http://www.pipedreaming.org.uk/soundtrack/
|