- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@akamai.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 11:04:07 -0700
- To: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3c.org
On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 07:15:41AM -0400, Doug Davis wrote: > - R802 > Need to define "processing" - does having to XML parse the message > mean "process"? There's been some discussion on the soapbuilders > mailing list about what SOAP processing nodes can and can not do > to certain parts of a SOAP envelope. Defining "process" in XMLP > might help clear some of those up. This complaint has come up a number of times, but I don't know of it being addressed. I *think* the original motivation was to assure that intermediaries wouldn't have to buffer an entire message if the handlers that are invoked on them don't require it. The implications of this re: parsing aren't clear to me (but probably are to others in the group). 'processing' is a bad term for this, but it slipped through. Perhaps we can revise the requirement to reflect the above, if consensus supports it. Generally re: 'processing', There's been some discussion about the constraints on message processing in XMLP, but I don't think there's consensus yet about what they should be. -- Mark Nottingham, Research Scientist Akamai Technologies (San Mateo, CA USA)
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2001 14:04:44 UTC