- From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 11:15:20 -0400
- To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
I'm not sure that I agree. I seem to recall that we made an explicit change
to
the current text precisely because we wanted to call out a clear
distinction
between the dual interpretations of the intended meaning of the term
"process".
I agree with your interpretation of what is meant in (i) and (ii) below.
However,
the proposed text seems to make it less clear that this is the intended
interpretation
because the distinction between SOAP-level processing and application-level
processing of SOAP header blocks is lost and the only interpreted meaning
left is application-level processing.
Personally, I prefer the current wording.
Cheers,
Christopher Ferris
Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
phone: +1 508 234 3624
Marc Hadley
<marc.hadley@sun. To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
com> cc:
Sent by: Subject: LC Issue 229
xml-dist-app-requ
est@w3.org
07/11/2002 10:13
AM
On last nights WG telcon I took an action to try to clarify LC
Issue 229[1]:
"Section 2.6 Processing SOAP Messages of SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1:
Messaging Framework reads:
| 4. Process all header blocks targeted at the node and, in the
case of
| an ultimate SOAP receiver, the SOAP body. A SOAP node MUST
process
| all SOAP header blocks targeted at it. A SOAP node MAY choose to
| ignore the application level processing specified by
non-mandatory
| SOAP header blocks targeted at it.
The last two sentences seem contradictory. A SOAP node:
- MUST process all SOAP header blocks targeted at it.
- MAY choose to ignore the application level processing specified by
non-mandatory SOAP header blocks targeted at it."
I think this issue originates in a dual meaning of 'process' in the
above text:
(i) "A SOAP node MUST process all SOAP header blocks targeted at it."
I think this means that a node must follow the SOAP processing
rules for all header blocks targetted at it (whether they are acted
upon or not). I.e. remove those blocks if the message is forwarded.
(ii) "A SOAP node MAY choose to ignore the application level
processing specified by non-mandatory SOAP header blocks targeted
at it."
I think this means that a node can choose not to perform the
processing requested by the presence of non-mandatory header blocks.
Proposal
========
I agree with the issue originator that the above wording is
confusing and would like to offer the following proposed
replacement (which is a reworded version of that provided by the
issue originator).
"4. Process all mandatory header blocks targeted at the node and,
in the case of an ultimate SOAP receiver, the SOAP body. A SOAP
node MAY also choose to process non-mandatory SOAP header blocks
targeted at it."
Note that Section 2.7.1 contains the following paragraph:
"Forwarding intermediaries MUST process the message according to
the SOAP processing model defined in 2.6 Processing SOAP Messages.
They MUST also remove from the message all SOAP header blocks
targeted at themselves, prior to forwarding, regardless of whether
these header blocks were processed or ignored."
This seems to cover the implications of (i) above nicely.
Regards,
Marc.
[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x229
--
Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
XML Technology Center, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Thursday, 11 July 2002 11:21:23 UTC