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

Issue 392: revised proposal

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:22:26 +0100
Message-ID: <3DBFF932.56CF3A01@crf.canon.fr>
To: "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
CC: Noah Mendelsohn <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, Mark Jones <jones@research.att.com>, Herve Ruellan <ruellan@crf.canon.fr>, David Fallside <fallside@us.ibm.com>

I took an action to provide a revised resolution for issue 392. I
hope this captures all the points which were raised during this
morning's discussion. Apologies for the wording, it is a litle


Intermediary Considerations
A SOAP message can travel through zero or more SOAP
intermediaries. This sections describes the requirements posed on
SOAP intermediaries supporting this specification.

A SOAP intermediary MUST be able to access any secondary part.

A forwarding SOAP intermediary MUST in general forward every
secondary parts contained in the incoming SOAP message, except
when the specification for a SOAP header block calls for the part
to be removed or changed. An active SOAP intermediary MAY change
or remove any secondary part even in the absence of such a
mandate. It is strongly recommended that such changes be
described in a manner that allows such modifications to be
detected by affected SOAP nodes further along the message path.
[*Ednote: do we want this fine distinction? If not, we could just
delete the last two sentences.*]

A SOAP intermediary MAY insert new secondary parts.

The integrity of the URI scheme used to reference secondary parts
MUST be maintained accross SOAP intermediaries.
Received on Wednesday, 30 October 2002 10:22:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:21 UTC