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

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

From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 10:57:04 -0700
Message-ID: <92456F6B84D1324C943905BEEAE0278E02D3093F@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: "Jacek Kopecky" <jacek@systinet.com>, "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, "Noah Mendelsohn" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "XMLP Dist App" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

Jean-Jacques, 

I think these additions add significantly to the utility of the table.
Thanks for producing it.

Gudge

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Jacques Moreau [mailto:moreau@crf.canon.fr] 
> Sent: 18 October 2002 00:42
> To: Martin Gudgin
> Cc: Jacek Kopecky; Henrik Frystyk Nielsen; Noah Mendelsohn; 
> XMLP Dist App
> Subject: Re: Proposal for new last call issue: Some 
> unprocessed headers should stay
> 
> 
> Gudge,
> 
> Good table. I think it is worth adding whether the role was 
> assumed or not. This is especially useful for user-defined roles 
> (such as "cacheManager").
> 
> I've updated the table accordingly.
> 
> |------------------------|----------------------------|
> |            Role        |         Header             |
> |              |         | Understood |               |
> | Name         | Assumed |& Processed | Forwarded     |
> |--------------|---------|------------|---------------|
> |              |         | Yes        | No, unless    |
> |              |         |            | reinserted    |
> | relay        | Yes     |------------|---------------|
> |              |         | No         | Yes           |
> |--------------|---------|------------|---------------|
> |              |         | Yes        | No, unless    |
> |              |         |            | reinserted    |
> | next         | Yes     |------------|---------------|
> |              |         | No         | No            |
> |--------------|---------|------------|---------------|
> |              |         | Yes        | No, unless    |
> |              |         |            | reinserted    |
> |              | Yes     |------------|---------------|
> |              |         | No         | No            |
> | user-defined |---------|------------|---------------|
> |              | No      | n/a        | Yes           |
> |--------------|---------|------------|---------------|
> |              |         | Yes        | n/a           |
> | ultimateRec. | Yes     |------------|---------------|
> |              |         | No         | n/a           |
> |--------------|---------|------------|---------------|
> | none         | No      | n/a        | Yes           |
> |--------------|---------|------------|---------------|
> 
> Jean-Jacques.
> 
> 
> Martin Gudgin wrote:
>  > |------------------|---------------------------|
>  > | Role             | Header will be forwarded? |
>  > |------------------|---------------------------|
>  > | relay            | Y |       Maybe           |
>  > |                  |---|-----------------------|
>  > |                  | N |       Yes             |
>  > |------------------|---|-----------------------|
>  > | next             | Y |       Maybe           |
>  > |                  |---|-----------------------|
>  > |                  | N |       No              |
>  > |------------------|---|-----------------------|
>  > | ultimateReceiver | Y |       Not applicable  |
>  > |                  |---|-----------------------|
>  > |                  | N |       Not applicable  |
>  > |------------------|---|-----------------------|
>  > | none             | Y |       Yes             |
>  > |                  |---|-----------------------|
>  > |                  | N |       Yes             |
>  > |------------------|---|-----------------------|
>  >
>  >
>  > The Y/N column indicates whether the SOAP node understands the 
> header
>  > block ( note this is independent of the value of 
> soap:mustUnderstand ).
>  >
>  >
>  > A 'Yes' indicates that the header will always be 
> forwarded.  > A 'No' indicates that the header will never be 
> forwarded.  > A 'Not applicable' means the forwarding never 
> occurs.  > A 'Maybe' indicates that whether the header block 
> is forwarded 
> or not
>  > depends on the spec for the header. I realise that this is not 
> *really*
>  > a 'forward' but rather a 're-insert'
>  >
>  > Does this help at all?
>  >
>  > Gudge
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 18 October 2002 13:57:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:11 GMT