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

RE: Issue 140 bogus?

From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 21:04:49 -0400
To: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Cc: jacek@idoox.com, skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF8A3E16CB.5F742436-ON85256AE1.00062EFE@lotus.com>
Henrik Frystyk Nielsen writes:

>> I would prefer to be formal
>> about saying *what* it means 
>> to act in the role of the anonymous actor,
>> rather than *how* that can be accomplished

The question, I think, is what can you say about the message path.  Is it 
possible that it extends beyond the node assuming the anonymous role?  Is 
it possible that a path like this would emerge:

        A -> B -> ANON -> C -> ANON -> D

SOAP 1.1 sure seems to rule that out. It says:

"Omitting the SOAP actor attribute indicates that the recipient is the 
ultimate destination of the SOAP message."

I think that pretty formally boils down to "the message path ends at the 
node assuming the anonymous role.  There can be no node further along the 
message path, and there can therefore be no more than one node assuming 
the anonymous role."  I don't think that's unduly telling the node how to 
do its job.

Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 21:13:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:16 UTC