In the spec, at: http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/index-all.html#submit-event under point #5, it says, "For an error response nothing in the document is replaced, and submit processing concludes after dispatching xforms-submit-error". However, we don't seem to be doing that. If I submit to http://www.xformstest.org/cgi-bin/echo.shakakahaka, for example, I get a 404 message back. We display the error page, but I don't get the xforms-submit-error to popup. None of the other processors display the popup, either. It seems to me that in ::OnStopRequest we should be checking to see if the channel is a HttpChannel and if it is, then we should be checking channel->GetResponseStatus to see if we got a 4xx or not. Not just looking at the value of status coming in.

testcase that shows the problem

Here is a less confusing testcase. The other obsolete testcase WOULD show the xforms-submit-error but only if you didn't have bugzilla in your trusted list for cross domain submission. This testcase should show the anticipated failure.

Submitting to a 404 sounds like a good error case. Ask the WG? :)

Comment on attachment 197582 [details] [diff] [review] le patch >Index: extensions/xforms/nsXFormsSubmissionElement.cpp >=================================================================== >RCS file: /cvsroot/mozilla/extensions/xforms/nsXFormsSubmissionElement.cpp,v >retrieving revision 1.40 >diff -u -1 -0 -r1.40 nsXFormsSubmissionElement.cpp >--- extensions/xforms/nsXFormsSubmissionElement.cpp 15 Sep 2005 11:37:37 -0000 1.40 >+++ extensions/xforms/nsXFormsSubmissionElement.cpp 27 Sep 2005 17:25:04 -0000 >@@ -408,20 +408,31 @@ > LOG(("xforms submission complete [status=%x]\n", status)); > > if (!mElement) { > return NS_OK; > } > > nsCOMPtr<nsIChannel> channel = do_QueryInterface(request); > NS_ASSERTION(channel, "request should be a channel"); > > PRBool succeeded = NS_SUCCEEDED(status); >+ >+ // Check if the return was a 4xx/5xx, since status will be set to true >+ // if a 404 (for example) with a message body was returend. >+ if (succeeded) { >+ nsCOMPtr<nsIHttpChannel> httpChannel = do_QueryInterface(channel); >+ >+ if (httpChannel) { >+ httpChannel->GetRequestSucceeded(&succeeded); >+ } >+ } >+ I would say that GetRequestSucceeded isn't the right test, since it will return false for anything that isn't a 2xx code. We are supposed to special case "an error response", not a 'non-success' response. 1xx and 3xx responses aren't errors. I would say that the test should be to check for 4xx and 5xx responses.

Allan, I told Kevin Kelly about this, but could you follow up on the next XForms call? We really need to know what the proper handling should be. In the case of a 4xx or 5xx http response, should we show any error page coming back from the server AND send the xforms-submit-error? Or just dispatch the xforms-submit-error event? Currently, Novell, fP and XSmiles all just show the response from the server and do NOT dispatch the error.

(In reply to comment #7) > Allan, I told Kevin Kelly about this, but could you follow up on the next > XForms > call? We really need to know what the proper handling should be. In the case > of a 4xx or 5xx http response, should we show any error page coming back from > the server AND send the xforms-submit-error? Or just dispatch the > xforms-submit-error event? Currently, Novell, fP and XSmiles all just show the > response from the server and do NOT dispatch the error. Re-reading this, and I must say that the spec. clearly says that on an "error response" nothing is done. By all means, a 404 is an error response. My interpretation is that, we should dispatch the error and do nothing else. I'll post to www-forms and ask though

(In reply to comment #7) > Allan, I told Kevin Kelly about this, but could you follow up on the next > XForms > call? We really need to know what the proper handling should be. In the case > of a 4xx or 5xx http response, should we show any error page coming back from > the server AND send the xforms-submit-error? Or just dispatch the > xforms-submit-error event? Currently, Novell, fP and XSmiles all just show the > response from the server and do NOT dispatch the error. Not a lot of direct replies, but there seems to be agreement on that that we should throw the error on 4xx and 5xx for 1.0. Needs to be "enhanced", but that's post 1.0 stuff.

Fixed on trunk