- From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 17:45:11 -0400
- To: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "Doug Davis" <dug@us.ibm.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Henrik writes: >> One of the points that Noah brings up >> is if the extensibility mechanism >> indeed is good enough and that is a valid concern. On the call just now, Glen brought up what I think is the area requiring greatest attention: if several headers for the same header all indicate mustUnderstand, can we say anything about the order processed? In SOAP 1.1, I think the answer is "no". Henrik suggests (a) that lexical order be significant -- I think that's a change to SOAP 1.1, though possibly a good idea (b) that rollback be required if later processing fails--I'm not sure this is practical, but we should consider it. Also: I don't think anything suggests that different actor URI's are necessarily different processors---so multiple header blocks addressed to what appear to be different actors might, in fact, interleave. Consider "next" as just one example. I'm not sure a lexical order dependency handles these cases gracefully. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2001 17:48:55 UTC