W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > January 2001

RE: xp requirement document specifies headers

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:23:14 -0800
Message-ID: <008d01c084c1$e98cfea0$308f3b9d@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Hugo Haas" <hugo@w3.org>, "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
The issue of footers/trailers is a good one and I think will lead to much
interesting discussion - it certainly did in HTTP where it was introduced in
HTTP/1.1 [31].

The SOAP/1.1 spec is somewhat ambiguous on the matter as it allows "other
stuff" after the body but doesn't say what to use it for or what the
processing model is. I actually thought there was an issue listed on the SOAP
issues list [30] but apparently I missed it. I will add one now.

I would note, however, that the glossary doesn't *define* much in terms of a
protocol. It defines a set of terms by which we can talk about the "thingies"
mentioned in the requirements document so I don't see a conflict here. I think
it would be nice to express this as a requirement and a usage scenario - maybe
expand a little on Yves' scenario below.

> However, I think that the glossary goes beyond this, defining[10] the
> XP message as containing an XP header and an XP body, ruling out, for
> example, footers.
>
> At the December face-to-face[9], Yves mentioned using footers (for
> example for MD5 sums):
>
>    Yves: Nothing precludes you from adding information at the
> end. If you
>    put headers at the beginning of the message for intermediaries,
>    doesn't preclude you

Henrik

[30] http://msdn.microsoft.com/xml/general/soapspec_issues.asp
[31] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.40
[32] http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/#_Toc478383494
Received on Monday, 22 January 2001 17:23:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:58 GMT