- From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 11:34:23 -0800
- To: "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>, <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: <rsalz@zolera.com>, "xml-dist-app" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
>The current spec does require header blocks to be forwarded in >the same >order they were received: "Such relayed SOAP messages MUST contain all >SOAP header blocks and the SOAP body 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)." Unless we change this rule I >am not convinced that we need sorting in the C14N algorithm. I think it was me who brought up the concern of oversimplifying the need for preserving order. The current requirement is very strict and I think will lead to problems in handling expectations of what intermediaries can do. What about saying something like the following... I think it is a compromise proposal that should clarify what intermediaries are allowed to do with respect to ordering: * A SOAP intermediary must not change the order of header blocks NOT targeted at it. * There are no ordering constraints for "re-inserted" header blocks. That is, if one uses "repeated header blocks" then an intermediary is NOT required to re-insert them in the same order as they were received nor necessarily in the same location in the SOAP message. * There are no restrictions on where a SOAP intermediary can insert additional header blocks. That is, an intermediary can insert blocks between any other blocks in a SOAP header. Hope this makes sense! Henrik
Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2002 14:35:39 UTC