- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 09:45:11 +0100
- To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- CC: www-tag@w3.org
Norman, SOAP's processing model is order agnostic, so you would have to write your example this way. Notice the use of the mustUnderstand attribute to make sure your "processing instructions" are not silently ignored. <s:Envelope> <s:Header> <myns:ignoreHeader role="intermed1" myns:QName="n1:yourHeader1" mustUnderstand="true"/> <n1:yourHeader1 role=intermed1"> ... </n1:yourHeader1> <myns:increaseHeaderPriority role="intermed2" myns:QName="n2:yourHeader2" mustUnderstand="true"/> <n2:yourHeader2 role=intermed2"> ... </n2:yourHeader2> </sHeader> <s:Body> <z:purchaseOrder> </z:purchaseOrder> </s:Body> </s:Envelope> Jean-Jacques. Norman Walsh wrote: > I don't see, in theory, how the problem is really different from > > <s:Envelope> > <s:Header> > <myns:ignoreTheNextHeader/> > <n1:yourHeader1 role=intermed1"> > ... > </n1:yourHeader1> > <myns:increaseThePriorityOfTheNextHeader/> > <n2:yourHeader2 role=intermed2"> > ... > </n2:yourHeader2> > </sHeader> > <s:Body> > <z:purchaseOrder> > </z:purchaseOrder > </s:Body> > </s:Envelope> > > But (obviously! :-) I haven't read the SOAP spec well enough to know > if that's covered or not.
Received on Monday, 20 January 2003 03:46:06 UTC