W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > March 2004

Re: Issue 455 closed: Representation header and SOAP processing model

From: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 23:29:25 -0800
Message-ID: <406138D5.309@oracle.com>
To: Jean-Jacques Moreau <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@systinet.com>, Noah Mendelsohn <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, XMLP Dist App <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

The resolution IIRC wasn't quite that.
It wasn't 'always reinserted'. It was --

Define a new role (name to be decided) that causes a Representation 
header block targeted to it be reinserted if processed.

(removed the always).
It is always reinserted only if relay is also true.

-Anish
--

Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:

> 
> What about the following amendment to your point 1?
> 
> <amendment>
> Define a new role (name to be decided) that causes any Representation 
> header block targeted to it to always be reinserted, even if processed.
> </amendment>
> 
> Jacek Kopecky wrote:
> 
>> Oh, I think your closing email [1] is a bit wrong and a bit confusing:
>>
>> it says the five numbered points are characteristics of the new role,
>> where only the second is, in fact. The first point isn't true (IIRC),
>> the use of the new role is totally up to the application; a
>> Representation header can be targeted at any other role and the usual
>> rules apply, including the points 3a, 3b and 4 in the closing email.
>>
>> I think the closing email should be rephrased to something like:
>>
>>
>>         At its recent f2f, the XMLP WG decided to close this issue with
>>         the following actions:
>>                 1. define a new role (name to be decided) that causes all
>>         Representation header blocks targeted to it always to be
>>         reinserted, even if processed.
>>                 2. Note that it's OK for multiple Representation 
>> header blocks
>>         in the same message to have the same URI and role. Such
>>         Representation header blocks would typically have different
>>         metadata.
>>                 3. Note that implementations MAY need to process 
>> Representation
>>         header blocks BEFORE other header blocks that might dereference
>>         URIs.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>                    Jacek Kopecky
>>
>>                    Systinet Corporation
>>                    http://www.systinet.com/
>>
>>
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlp-comments/2004Mar/0024.html
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 2004-03-22 at 16:56, Jean-Jacques Moreau wrote:
>>
>>> Yes it does! The (agreed) resolution says: "Define a new role as 
>>> above [plus other stuff]".
>>>
>>> "Above" says: "Proposal (again): Define a new role. Characteristics 
>>> of this role are; 1. if you process a Rep header targetted at this 
>>> role, you MUST resinsert it."
>>>
>>> If point 1. was not to be taken into consideration, why would the 
>>> agreed resolution say "as above"? My reading is that the scribe 
>>> figured out it could save some typing, instead of reinserting (again) 
>>> the whole proposal once more.
>>>
>>> You seem to be thinking otherwise.
>>>
>>> JJ.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2004 02:48:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:16 GMT