- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 13:58:52 +0200
- To: frystyk@microsoft.com
- CC: "'Frank DeRose'" <frankd@tibco.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Henrik, I don't think we have reached consensus over this issue yet. There have been discussions (eg, [1]) on what we target (applications, processors, "modules", handlers), and how we select a target (URI + namespace? URI only? etc), but I don't recall any firm conclusion. Jean-Jacques. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-protocol-wg/2001Mar/0144.html Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote: > I think we might have reached some sort of resolution on targeting in > the thread on SOAP actor model [1] and [2] where Staurt summarizes it as > follows: > > Basically: The answer to the question "What sort > of thing is an SOAP header/XMLP block target at?" > is "A SOAP/XMLP processor and/or it's associated > application." > > I think it is ok that this is not described in the glossary but rather > in the AM (we also don't mention mustUnderstand). > > Henrik > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Mar/0145.html > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2001Mar/0128.html > > ><quote> > >If we go with the current XML protocol terminology, I would > >recommend substituting the term "module" for the SOAP term > >"actor" in the prose below. I stuck with "actor" here to > >maintain familiarity with SOAP. </quote> > > > >Your mapping doesn't relate the SOAP:actor attribute to either > >an XMLP module (or to an XMLP handler). Does this need to be fixed?
Received on Monday, 26 March 2001 06:59:56 UTC