- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 09:20:59 +0200
- To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- CC: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@sun.com>, Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org, Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Henrik, with respect, we've been there before, and Doug's point[1-3] was exactly that an intermediary may not forward messages, and hence may not be a SOAP sender[4]. My understanding is that this was also Mark's POV[5]. Jean-Jacques. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2001Oct/0007.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2001Oct/0058.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Oct/0167.html [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2001Oct/0059.html [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2001Oct/0011.html Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote: > I don't think we can drop the notion that an intermediary is both a > sender and a receiver: > > "A SOAP intermediary is both a SOAP sender and a SOAP receiver, > target-able from with a SOAP message..." > > The important thing about an intermediary is that it acts on behalf of > another SOAP node. I think that is stated slightly implicit in terms of > initial sender and ultimate recipient but can live with it. > > >"A SOAP intermediary is a SOAP receiver, target-able from with > >a SOAP message, that is neither the intial SOAP sender nor the > >ultimate receiver of that message. It processes a SOAP message > >according to the SOAP processing model. A consequence of > >processing is that the SOAP message is sent further along the > >SOAP message path to the next SOAP node." > > Henrik
Received on Tuesday, 16 October 2001 03:22:23 UTC