Hi. I am wondering if Apache conforms to the SOAP 1.1 specification. I realize that the documentation indicates that it follows it, but I dont know if that means its 100% compliant. I am having a few difficulties with a test that I have written. I'm thinking its just that I am misunderstanding what the spec is trying to say...so Im hoping someone can clarify for me.
I get errors if I don't use namespaces on a SOAP Message. In the spec when defining the Envelope element, I see that it says: 'The element MAY contain namespace declarations as well as additional attributes' As far as I can see by looking at the code on the MessageRouterServlet, the envelope MUST contain namespace information or it will blow up. The same thing holds true for the Body element: 'The element MAY contain a set of body entries each being an immediate child element of the SOAP Body element. Immediate child elements of the SOAP Body element MAY be namespace-qualified. SOAP defines the SOAP Fault element, which is used to indicate error messages ' Again it says 'MAY' be namespace qualified but the MessageRouterServlet blows up without the namespace. for example, something like this works: <SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"; xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/1999/XMLSchema-instance"; xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/1999/XMLSchema";> <SOAP-ENV:Body> <ns1:getAvailabilityMessage xmlns:ns1="urn:mpd:availabilityMessage"> ... </ns1:getAvailabilityMessage> </SOAP-ENV:Body> </SOAP-ENV:Envelope> ... whereas something like this doesnt <Envelope> <Body> <getAvailabilityMessage> ... </getAvailabilityMessage> </Body> </Envelope> ... Apache implementation to Apache implementation, there are no problems. But Im trying to respond to an XML message request from Biztalk and it has no namespace info. Anyone got any clarification on what the spec means or options on the servlet I can set to change it? Or will I have to have the folks with the Biztalk implementation make some changes or change the code on the MessageRouterServlet? Thanks a lot Mike
