W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > July 2003

RE: Revised proposed text for intermediary

From: <michael.mahan@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:52:11 -0400
Message-ID: <5C76D29CD0FA3143896D08BB1743296A0101CF44@bsebe001.americas.nokia.com>
To: <hugo@w3.org>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Cc: <w3c-wsa-editors@w3.org>

> Intermediary
> Definition
>  An intermediary is an agent that is both a message recipient and a
>  message sender. An intermediary may process some aspect of the
>  message, and acts to forward the message to the next message
>  recipient towards an ultimate message receiver along the message
>  path.

Are we purposefully relaxing XMLP's definition [1] of SOAP intermediary
purposes of the architecture?

"A SOAP intermediary is both a SOAP receiver and a SOAP sender and is 
targetable from within a SOAP message. It processes the SOAP header
targeted at it and acts to forward a SOAP message towards an ultimate

I read that a SOAP intermediary, by definition,
1) is explicitly targeted via a SOAP message 
2) must processes SOAP header blocks
If we are not relaxing the definition, then I would s/may/must/

> Relationships to other elements
>   an intermediary is
>           an agent
>   an intermediary may have partial access
>           to messages it processes.

If we are not trying to relax the SOAP definition, then by 
same reasoning, I would say:

An intermediary must process the message according to its application
role. T
he post-processed message is forwarded. 

> Explanation
>   Intermediaries process messages and then forward them along the
>   message path. An intermediary is not the ultimate message recipient
>   of a message.
>   A message may be intended for an intermediary, or may be
>   transparently processed by one.

This is confusing if we are consistent with SOAP defintion. If a SOAP
arrives at a SOAP intermediary to be processed, then it must have been

Not sure what transparent means. It seems like you mean that an
intermediary can 
process a message even if the message was not intended to arrive there.
This makes
no sense to me. SOAP messages are hop to hop so if it arrives at hop_2
then hop_1 must
have intended for that to happen. Or maybe I am missing something here.

>   An intermediary may act as a gateway to bridge transport services,
>   or may process specific aspects of messages (such as security
>   information).

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part1-20030624/
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2003 16:52:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:08 UTC