W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlp-comments@w3.org > March 2004

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

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:52:05 -0500
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Cc: Dear XMLP Comments <xmlp-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF96DE9141.12C61F32-ON85256E5A.0067CD1D@lotus.com>

First of all, I formally accept this resolution.  We can move ahead, thank 
you. 

I should note that, on reflection, I think it would have made sense to say 
that "if the processing node has knowledge of the role to which the header 
is addressed, and if the node is aware that no other downstream node can 
act in such a role, then the representation header need not be reinserted; 
 in all other situations it MUST be reinserted."  This would avoid the 
need to send a large representation past an intermediary which had good 
reason to believe that it would be useless anyway.

I see no need to reopen the issue unless this observation gets widespread 
support.  Thank you.

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------








"Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Sent by: xmlp-comments-request@w3.org
03/17/04 04:08 AM

 
        To:     noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
        cc:     Dear XMLP Comments <xmlp-comments@w3.org>
        Subject:        Issue 455 closed: Representation header and SOAP processing model



Dear Noah,

You raised issue #455 about the interaction between the SOAP processing 
model and the Representation Header.

At its recent f2f, the XMLP WG decided to close[1] this issue by 
defining a new role (name to be decided), with the following 
characteristics:

1. The role will be used to target all Representation header blocks.

2. The Representation header block MUST always be reinserted, even if 
processed.

3a. It's OK for multiple Representation header blocks in the same 
message to have the same URI and role.

3b. Such Representation header blocks would typically have different 
metadata.

4. Implementations MAY need to process Representation header blocks 
BEFORE other header blocks that might dereference URIs.

Please let us know immediately if you do not agree with this resolution.

Regards,

Jean-Jacques.

[1] <http://www.w3.org/2004/03/02-xmlprotocol-irc.txt>
Received on Wednesday, 17 March 2004 13:54:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:40:22 UTC