- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 22:25:30 -0500
- To: chris.ferris@sun.com
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Sorry I missed the call. This seems like an excellent middle ground resolution. Thanks! ------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 IBM Corporation Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@sun.com> Sent by: xml-dist-app-request@w3.org 02/08/2002 01:15 PM To: xml-dist-app@w3.org cc: Subject: TBTF: revised proposed resolution for i178 During today's TBTF call, the TBTF team discussed my original proposal[1] to propose a resolution for i178[2]. The following represents the agreed-upon modifications to that proposal. Refer to the TBTF minutes[3] for discussion details. The general consensus of the TBTF was that while the binding framework provides for the possibility that end-to-end features may be expressed outside the SOAP envelope, it does not define an explicit architecture for the processing of these features. The TBTF considers this to be outside the scope of our specification(s). We concluded that by adding a note to the spec that states this, and an accompanying recommendation that such end-to-end features should be expressed as SOAP header extensions, so they may take advantage of the SOAP processing model, that this should be sufficient to close issue 178. Suggested/proposed language for the spec (editors to insert atan appropriate place at the end of section 5.1) follows: Note: Certain features may require end-to-end as opposed to hop-to-hop processing semantics. While the binding framework provides for the possibility that such features may be expressed outside the SOAP envelope, it does not define a specific architecture for the processing or error handling of these externally expressed features by a SOAP intermediary. A binding specification that expresses such features external to the SOAP envelope should define its own processing rules to which a SOAP node is expected to conform (for example, describing what information must be passed along with the SOAP message as it leaves the intermediary). It is recommended that end-to-end features should be expressed as SOAP header blocks so that they may avail themselves of the SOAP processing rules [ref]. Cheers, Chris [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2002Feb/0059.html [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-issues.html#x178
Received on Sunday, 10 February 2002 22:39:00 UTC