- From: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@sun.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 11:23:35 -0400
- To: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
- CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org
+1 to consistency. I have no preference for forwarded vs relayed. In fact, the cited text says "sent further along the message path" which I prefer to either forwarded or relayed. How 'bout: "A SOAP intermediary is a SOAP receiver, target-able from with a SOAP message, that is neither the intial SOAP sender nor the ultimate receiver of that message. It processes a SOAP message according to the SOAP processing model. A consequence of processing is that the SOAP message is sent further along the SOAP message path to the next SOAP node." I could just as easily be convinced that 'relayed' is appropriate. It does have a well understood architype. Let's pick one and use it consistently throughout. Cheers, Chris Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com wrote: > Chris Ferris suggests: > > "A SOAP intermediary is a SOAP receiver, target-able from with a SOAP > message, that is neither the intial SOAP sender nor the ultimate > receiver of that message. It processes a SOAP message according to the > SOAP > processing model. A consequence of processing is that the SOAP message > is forwarded further along the SOAP message path to the next SOAP node." > > Mostly, I like it, but I have a quibble with the word "forwarded". The > text in the SOAP 1.2 WD uses the term "relayed" [1]: > > "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.)" > > I have a very slight preference for relayed, but I think we should use > either "forwarded" or "relayed" consistently throughout the specification. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-soap12-20010709/#_Toc478383605 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 > Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >
Received on Monday, 15 October 2001 11:26:57 UTC