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

RE: [getf] Node MUST process? (was: [GETF] okay, here's an updated draft with Henrik's option B)

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 13:19:38 -0700
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D07D01613@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, "Christopher Ferris" <chris.ferris@sun.com>


As we talked about in the GETF this morning, my intent is not to modify
the SOAP processing rules but rather to acknowledge that one cannot
force somebody to be a SOAP node, it is a decision made on a per SOAP
message basis.

This is not a big deal but maybe we can as Noah suggested (I think)
clarify it in part 1, section 2, 2nd paragraph by expanding the sentence

	This section defines the SOAP distributed processing
	model.

to say 

	This section defines the SOAP distributed processing
	model. The processing model defined in this section
	applies to a single SOAP message independent of any
	other SOAP message.

Does this work?

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com

>Henrik, I'm confused. Aren't we saying elsewhere in the spec 
>things like: "A
>SOAP node MUST process all SOAP header blocks targeted at it." 
>? Isn't this
>precisely forcing a SOAP node to process a message? Why should this be
>different for MEPs?
>
>Jean-Jacques.
>
>Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:
>
>> * We can't force a SOAP node to process a message. However, 
>what we can
>> say is that *if* a SOAP message is processed it MUST be processed
>> according to the SOAP processing rules. I realize that it is slightly
>> different from what GETF talked about this morning but I 
>think we have
>> to be careful about how we formulate MUST requirements.
Received on Monday, 3 June 2002 16:21:03 GMT

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