Re: SOAP 1.2 editors on the hook for generating closing text for editorial issues

Henrik,

Here's a copy of my original message. Does it make sense?

Jean-Jacques.

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote:
> What's the issue with 280? Is it how we say that even though there are
> practical limits we don't restrict the ways SOAP may be extended?
> 
> Henrik 
> 
> 
>>>Ok, I've done mine, except #280 for which I'm awaiting further
>>>feedback.

attached mail follows:

[Proposal at the end]

Eds,

I was asked to close issue 280 with "no action" [1]. In looking 
at this issue further, I think I now concur with the issuer, and 
propose that we are more explicit about which changes are allowed 
to the processing model.

The issuer wondered whether the following text:

    "MUST clearly and completely specify the content and
    semantics of the SOAP header blocks used to implement
    the behavior in question, including if appropriate any
    modifications to the SOAP Processing model."

means that the SOAP processing model can be changed in arbritary 
ways, without any restriction.

Changes to the processing model are only hinted at in the section 
"SOAP processing model":

    "Mandatory SOAP header blocks are presumed to somehow
    modify the semantics of other SOAP header blocks or
    SOAP body elements."

    "The processing of one or more SOAP header blocks
    MAY control or determine the order of processing
    for other SOAP header blocks and/or the SOAP body.
    For example, one could create a SOAP header block
    to force processing of other SOAP header blocks in
    lexical order."

Suggestion: insert the following text in Section 3.2, bullet 2 
(now 3):

<proposed>
Such modifications include, for example, changing the
order in which SOAP headers blocks are processed (see
<specref ref="mustunderstand"/>). Another example
would be to completely replace the SOAP processing
model defined by this specification by one defined
by the corresponding SOAP module.
</proposed>

What do you think?

Jean-Jacques.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Aug/0039.html