Re: Intermediary Text

Thinking about it some more, maybe gateways could have their own, 
separate section.

JJ.

Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:

>> - Gateways. These are intermediaries deployed by which reside at the
>> trust boundary of web services provider. Gateways enable an
>> enterprise to provide a single point of contact to all requesters
>> outside its trust domain for all the Web services that it hosts.
>> Gateways may implement some business logic such as authentication,
>> authorization and privacy handling. Gateways can assume the role of
>> ultimate receiver of the message, or can be a true intermediary. -
>> Proxies/Adapters. These are intermediaries which assume the roles of
>> requester and provider respectively, in order to enable legacy
>> systems to participate in a web services application. (These are not
>> intermediaries in the strict sense of the SOAP processing model).
> 
> 
> Yes, gateways are not SOAP intermediaries (there was a discussion 
> earlier on this list; see for example [3]). So it's a bit odd to start 
> with an introduction on intermediaries and then expand to non-SOAP 
> intermediaries, apparently only for this paragraph. Maybe it should be 
> dropped entirely, or at least be toned down and come last?
> 
> [3] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Oct/0180.html>