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

Header order [was: An analysis of mustUnderstand and related issues]

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:37:20 +0200
Message-ID: <3B037FB0.77E45BA8@crf.canon.fr>
To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
CC: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com, Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org

You suggested last night that header blocks are not be reordered by
intermediaries (possibly implying that the order was that of the
intermediaries to visit?).

Since then, I have been thinking about the following scenario, and I am
wondering how it fits with your proposal. Let's suppose a given intermediary
processes one header block (A), reinserts a copy of that block (A') targeted
at the Next actor (which is not the ultimate destination), and adds two new
header blocks (B and C) targeted at the ultimate destination.

Where should the different blocks be inserted within the message? Should A',
B and C be inserted where A used to be (this would mean a simpler and more
efficient XMLP processor)? Or should B and C be inserted *instead* at the
end of the header section (which would mean editing the message in two
different places, plus adding the necessary intelligence to the processor to
do this smart editing)?


PS. BTW, does SOAP currently prohibit blocks to be added *en route* to the
body section?

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:

> applications can take advantage of the fact that header entries are not
> reordered.
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2001 03:38:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:13 UTC