RE: Proposal for new last call issue: Some unprocessed headers should stay

>Are you suggesting we should use "relayIfNotProcessed" instead? 
>Is that a go-back-to-WD solution? (Yves?)

The concern I have with this model is that I think it tends to
introduces more edge cases than the relay role with respect to
interactions with existing semantics in the SOAP. The examples that I
have run into are:

        <soap:Header>
                <hfn:myHeader role="..any role you like..." 
                                mustUnderstand="true"
                                relayIfNotProcessed="true">
                        ...
                </hfn:myHeader>
        </soap:Header>

and

        <soap:Header>
                <hfn:myHeader role="none" 
                                relayIfNotProcessed="false">
                        ...
                </hfn:myHeader>
        </soap:Header>

and

        <soap:Header>
                <hfn:myHeader role="ultimate receiver" 
                                relayIfNotProcessed="true">
                        ...
                </hfn:myHeader>
        </soap:Header>

I haven't found similar complications with the relay role.

Henrik