Fw: Issue 455 closed: Representation header and SOAP processing model

David Fallside <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.text.xml.distributed
Message-ID <OF2F5EA059.CD826407-ON88256E5B.006A168E-88256E5B.006A2FD9@us.ibm.com>




moving to a discussion list .....


............................................
David C. Fallside, IBM
Data Management Standards
Tel 530.477.7169 (TL 544.9665)
[email protected]

----- Forwarded by David Fallside/Santa Teresa/IBM on 03/18/2004 11:18 AM
-----
                                                                           
             Anish Karmarkar                                               
             <Anish.Karmarkar@                                             
             oracle.com>                                                To 
             Sent by:                  Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM@Lotus 
             xmlp-comments-req                                          cc 
             [email protected]               Jean-Jacques Moreau                 
                                       <[email protected]>, 
                                       Dear XMLP Comments                  
             03/18/2004 11:07          <[email protected]>              
             AM                                                    Subject 
                                       Re: Issue 455 closed:               
                                       Representation header and SOAP      
                                       processing model                    
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           





[email protected] wrote:

> First of all, I formally accept this resolution.  We can move ahead,
thank
> you.
>
> I should note that, on reflection, I think it would have made sense to
say
> that "if the processing node has knowledge of the role to which the
header
> is addressed, and if the node is aware that no other downstream node can
> act in such a role, then the representation header need not be
reinserted;
>  in all other situations it MUST be reinserted."  This would avoid the
> need to send a large representation past an intermediary which had good
> reason to believe that it would be useless anyway.
>

I would imagine that a node that has knowledge of the downstream nodes
and their capabilities/roles would be an active intermediary and in that
case all bets are off. Comments?

> I see no need to reopen the issue unless this observation gets widespread

> support.  Thank you.
>
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <[email protected]>
> Sent by: [email protected]
> 03/17/04 04:08 AM
>
>
>         To:     [email protected]
>         cc:     Dear XMLP Comments <[email protected]>
>         Subject:        Issue 455 closed: Representation header and SOAP
processing model
>
>
>
> Dear Noah,
>
> You raised issue #455 about the interaction between the SOAP processing
> model and the Representation Header.
>
> At its recent f2f, the XMLP WG decided to close[1] this issue by
> defining a new role (name to be decided), with the following
> characteristics:
>
> 1. The role will be used to target all Representation header blocks.
>
> 2. The Representation header block MUST always be reinserted, even if
> processed.
>
> 3a. It's OK for multiple Representation header blocks in the same
> message to have the same URI and role.
>
> 3b. Such Representation header blocks would typically have different
> metadata.
>
> 4. Implementations MAY need to process Representation header blocks
> BEFORE other header blocks that might dereference URIs.
>
> Please let us know immediately if you do not agree with this resolution.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jean-Jacques.
>
> [1] <http://www.w3.org/2004/03/02-xmlprotocol-irc.txt>
>
>
>
>
pic23262.gif (image/gif, 1.2 KB) - not displayed
ecblank.gif (image/gif, 45 B) - not displayed
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.