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

Re: Issue 146 proposed resolution

From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 17:01:46 -0500
To: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Cc: skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF516E9DDB.5FAF5A78-ON85256B04.00743C00@lotus.com>
I'm not sure this really resolves 146.  You are proposing:

>> A SOAP node that is acting in the role of 
>> the ultimate destination is responsible 
>> for processing all parts of the message 
>> intended for the anonymous actor including 
>> the body according to the rules described in
>> this section.

The text you suggest doesn't seem to prevent a node playing the role of 
the anonymous actor from acting as an intermediary and relaying the 
message.  Furthermore,  [1] says:

"Additional SOAP header blocks MAY be inserted at any point in the SOAP 
message, and such inserted SOAP header blocks MAY be indistinguishable 
from one or more just removed"

According to this, such a node can not only serve as an intermediary, it 
can reinsert at least header blocks for processing downstream.

I would still prefer to indicate that, from the point of view of the SOAP 
processing model, any node assuming the role of the anonymous actor is the 
end of the line.  It cannot relay messages.  It can generate responses, 
etc., if that's what the MEP calls for, but those are considered separate 
messages.


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-soap12-part1-20011002/#procsoapmsgs

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------------







"Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Sent by: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org
11/14/01 01:46 PM

 
        To:     <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
        cc:     "Stuart' 'Williams (E-mail)" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, (bcc: Noah 
Mendelsohn/CAM/Lotus)
        Subject:        Issue 146 proposed resolution


Stuart and I chatted about our action item regarding issue 146 [1] and I
promised to send something out so here goes. Currently, the last
paragraph in section 2.5 [2] says:

"If the SOAP node is a SOAP intermediary, the SOAP message pattern and
results of processing (e.g. no fault generated) MAY require that the
SOAP message be sent further along the SOAP message path. Such relayed
SOAP messages MUST contain all SOAP header blocks and the SOAP body
blocks from the original SOAP message, in the original order, except
that SOAP header blocks targeted at the SOAP intermediary MUST be
removed (such SOAP blocks are removed regardless of whether they were
processed or ignored). Additional SOAP header blocks MAY be inserted at
any point in the SOAP message, and such inserted SOAP header blocks MAY
be indistinguishable from one or more just removed (effectively leaving
them in place, but emphasizing the need to reinterpret at each SOAP node
along the SOAP message path.)"

The suggested resolution to issue 146 is to add a paragraph like this:

"A SOAP node that is acting in the role of the ultimate destination is
responsible for processing all parts of the message intended for the
anonymous actor including the body according to the rules described in
this section."

Note, the use of "anonymous actor" in order to follow the convention in
section 2. Personally, I would prefer "default actor", though. The rules
refer to the two points listed in section 2.5 [2].

Comments?

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com

[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues#x146
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-soap12-part1-20011002/#procsoapmsgs
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2001 17:16:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:04 GMT