W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlp-comments@w3.org > September 2002

RE: LC Issue 250: closed, editorial: text changed

From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 10:21:53 -0700
Message-ID: <92456F6B84D1324C943905BEEAE0278E02D2E008@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <reagle@w3.org>, "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, <xmlp-comments@w3.org>
Cc: "Hoelzing, Gerd" <gerd.hoelzing@sap.com>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

It's specified in 2.2 which says:

"http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope/role/next". Each SOAP
intermediary and the ultimate SOAP receiver MUST act in this role and
MAY additionally assume zero or more other SOAP roles.

So EVERYONE acts as 'next'. Or put another way, if you see something
marked soap:role='http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope/role/next'
then it IS for you! Are you saying we need MORE definition than this?

Gudge


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph Reagle [mailto:reagle@w3.org] 
> Sent: 26 September 2002 10:13
> To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen; noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com; 
> xmlp-comments@w3.org
> Cc: Hoelzing, Gerd; xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: Re: LC Issue 250: closed, editorial: text changed
> 
> 
> 
> On Thursday 26 September 2002 12:50 pm, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:
> > 1) What is the identifier of a particular role
> > 2) What are the requirements to a SOAP node acting in that 
> particular 
> > role
> > 3) How are roles used in the SOAP processing model
> >
> > As you mention, the text we have discussed cover 1) and 2). 
> The third 
> > is covered in section 2.6 which states that the concept of roles is 
> > integral to the SOAP processing model. For example, the 
> first step in 
> > the processing model is to determine the set of roles a 
> SOAP node acts
> > in:
> >
> > "1. Determine the set of roles in which the node is to act. The 
> > contents of the SOAP envelope, including any SOAP header blocks and 
> > the SOAP body, MAY be inspected in making such determination."
> 
> Ok, but *where* is the next role *actually* defined? For 
> example, behaviours 
> for a ultimateReceiver are specified throughout the 
> specification (perhaps 
> it would be nice to have a conformance section which gathered 
> them) but I'm 
> still at a lost for next.
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 13:22:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:42:27 GMT