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

Re: [soapbuilders] Re: An analysis of mustUnderstand and related issues

From: Rich Salz <rsalz@zolera.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 22:09:59 -0400
Message-ID: <3B0DBEF7.45F046D4@zolera.com>
To: Noah Mendelsohn <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org
{soapbuilders elided}

I have a question about:
Were you intending that this element can appear more than once?  If not,
then intermediates who add headers might need to edit this, which could
break things if the SOAP message were signed.  If the element can appear
more than once, then the DSIG problem is more tractable, but doesn't
this compound the problem Glen described?

It seems feasible to collapse mustHappen and hasHappened into a single
attribute like processingStatus (happenStance? :) with values "must" and
"done".  That way you
could leave the original Header element (you might need to keep it for
end-to-end audit); just ignore headers with processingStatus="done"

dependsOn bothers me.  It adds complexity to the SOAP infrastructure,
and it's not clear that it gains much; header processors can do their
own dependency checking now, and I think we shoudl wait to get some
(heck, any:) data on real-world dependency uses first.
Received on Thursday, 24 May 2001 22:04:54 UTC

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