W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > April 2002

Re: Possible issue on definition of Intermediaries

From: Grahame Grieve <grahame@kestral.com.au>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 08:57:28 +1000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020404084707.01f5c060@www.kestral.com.au>
To: xml-dist-app@w3.org


 >
 > <original>
 > The semantics of one or more SOAP blocks in a SOAP message, or the SOAP
 > message exchange pattern used MAY request that the SOAP message be
 > forwarded to another SOAP node on behalf of the initiator of the inbound
 > SOAP message. In this case, the processing SOAP node acts in the role of
 > a SOAP intermediary.
 > </original>
 >
 > <proposal>
 > When a SOAP node forwards a SOAP message received from another SOAP
 > node, it MUST acts in the role of a SOAP intermediary. Such forwarding
 > may be requested by the semantics of one or more SOAP blocks in the SOAP
 > message, by the SOAP message exchange pattern used or by any other means.
 > </proposal>

The first half is an improvement, but it would be nice if the second
part wasn't so open. I suppose it's fruitless trying to be more specific
in the lack of any metadata relating to "SOAP blocks in the SOAP message" or
"the SOAP message exchange pattern" in terms of forwarding requirements.
It would be valid (I think) to extend the binding to specify this. This is
the sort of thing that middleware developers [me] like to do because it makes
for fast decision making processes. I'm not sure if that kind of "any
other means" is what you had in mind

Though it's not as bad as this (taken from http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part2/):

 > A NULL value or a default value MAY be represented by omission of the 
accessor
 > element. A NULL value MAY also be indicated by an accessor element 
containing
 > the attribute xsi:nil with value "1 or true" or possibly other
 > application-dependent attributes and values

This kind of thing makes useful interoperability somewhat hard to achieve.
One SOAP implementation uses xsi:null, but can still claim to be compliant,
even though xsi:null is not defined in the schema specification

Grahame
Received on Wednesday, 3 April 2002 18:07:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:09 GMT