Hmm....didn't catch that one in my incr. cache patches - I think I've probably cut it out. Have to add it back later I guess.
That isn't a very good general solution though.....eg. it wouldn't work with incr. caching.
It could be made to with a 'passthru_next' (or even passthrough...), one could then just interleave cache modules with processing modules and get incremental caching.
--r
