- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 09:37:20 +0200
- To: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- CC: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com, Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Henrik, You suggested last night that header blocks are not be reordered by intermediaries (possibly implying that the order was that of the intermediaries to visit?). Since then, I have been thinking about the following scenario, and I am wondering how it fits with your proposal. Let's suppose a given intermediary processes one header block (A), reinserts a copy of that block (A') targeted at the Next actor (which is not the ultimate destination), and adds two new header blocks (B and C) targeted at the ultimate destination. Where should the different blocks be inserted within the message? Should A', B and C be inserted where A used to be (this would mean a simpler and more efficient XMLP processor)? Or should B and C be inserted *instead* at the end of the header section (which would mean editing the message in two different places, plus adding the necessary intelligence to the processor to do this smart editing)? Jean-Jacques. PS. BTW, does SOAP currently prohibit blocks to be added *en route* to the body section? Henrik Frystyk Nielsen wrote: > applications can take advantage of the fact that header entries are not > reordered.
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2001 03:38:49 UTC