Issue 146 proposed resolution

Stuart and I chatted about our action item regarding issue 146 [1] and I
promised to send something out so here goes. Currently, the last
paragraph in section 2.5 [2] says:

"If the SOAP node is a SOAP intermediary, the SOAP message pattern and
results of processing (e.g. no fault generated) MAY require that the
SOAP message be sent further along the SOAP message path. Such relayed
SOAP messages MUST contain all SOAP header blocks and the SOAP body
blocks from the original SOAP message, in the original order, except
that SOAP header blocks targeted at the SOAP intermediary MUST be
removed (such SOAP blocks are removed regardless of whether they were
processed or ignored). Additional SOAP header blocks MAY be inserted at
any point in the SOAP message, and such inserted SOAP header blocks MAY
be indistinguishable from one or more just removed (effectively leaving
them in place, but emphasizing the need to reinterpret at each SOAP node
along the SOAP message path.)"

The suggested resolution to issue 146 is to add a paragraph like this:

"A SOAP node that is acting in the role of the ultimate destination is
responsible for processing all parts of the message intended for the
anonymous actor including the body according to the rules described in
this section."

Note, the use of "anonymous actor" in order to follow the convention in
section 2. Personally, I would prefer "default actor", though. The rules
refer to the two points listed in section 2.5 [2].


Henrik Frystyk Nielsen


Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2001 13:47:20 UTC