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

RE: XP->SOAP/1.1 requirement mappings for R8xx (Intermediaries)

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:42:33 -0800
Message-ID: <015201c08bbd$f4f28c30$308f3b9d@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@akamai.com>, "XML Distributed Applications List" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> [comments/additions/corrections welcome.]

You asked for it ;)
 
> * R803 - "... must not preclude the use of transport bindings that
>           define transport intermediary roles..."
> 
>          The relationship between the transport binding and message
>          is implied in "Using SOAP in HTTP":
>            http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/#_Toc478383526
> 
>          SOAP doesn't have a firm conception of a protocol binding or
>          the requirments placed upon it - HTTP is assumed.

I am not sure what you mean by "assume" - the SOAP spec refers several
places to text indicating that HTTP is not assumed. An example is
section 1.3 where it refers to example 1 [1]:

    "It is worth noting that the rules governing XML
    payload format in SOAP are entirely independent of the
    fact that the payload is carried in HTTP."

In section 2 [2] it also talks about bindings:

    Regardless of the protocol to which SOAP is bound, messages
    are routed along a so-called "message path", which allows
    for processing at one or more intermediate nodes in addition
    to the ultimate destination.
 
> * R811 - "... must define and accommodate processing intermediaries."
> 
>          SOAP accommodates processing intermediaries, but does not
>          define them. See also R806 and R808.

I believe it does talk about intermediaries in the sense that it defines
them as being SOAP processors like any other SOAP processor and defines
a processing model for all SOAP processors. Is this what you are
referring to?
 
> * R806 - "... must define mechanisms that allow XP 
> processors, including
>          intermediaries, to identify XP blocks which they are
>          eligible to process."
> 
>          SOAP allows targeting through the "actor" attribute. 
>            http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/#_Toc478383499
> 
>          The value of the attribute may be underspecified; currently,
>          there is no standard way to refer to intermediaries with a
>          URI.  Additionally, it may be desireable to target an XP
>          Block by means other than direct reference or 'hop-by-hop',
>          as described.

I agree that it doesn't say which URI to pick and that might be good to
do.
 
Henrik

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/#_Toc478383490
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/#_Toc478383491
Received on Wednesday, 31 January 2001 14:43:09 GMT

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