- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:28:56 -0800
- To: "MOREAU Jean-Jacques" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@akamai.com>
- Cc: "XML Distributed Applications List" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>, "RUELLAN Herve" <ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
> Mark, I've been reading this whole section as meaning > intermediaries are > optional, i.e. some XP requests will contain information destined at > intermediairies, others will not; but I don't think this has > been made very > explicit so far. > > Shouldn't we clarify the surrounding text, and/or add a > further requirement? > (unless we think all XP implementations should definitely support > intermediaries) There is a fine destinction here between including information destined at intermediaries and having XP processors support intermediaries. The former is a question of indicating intended use of intermediaries within a message, the latter about defining a processing model that included intermediaries. It is absolutely a must that the processing model includes intermediaries as it is very difficult to retrofit this later on. We learned that the hard way from HTTP. And, in order to actually use intermediaries, we also need a mechanism for addressing them. Henrik
Received on Monday, 13 November 2000 21:29:39 UTC