W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > February 2003

RE: Proposed renamings

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:08:55 -0800
To: "'Jacek Kopecky'" <jacek@systinet.com>, "'Philippe Le Hegaret'" <plh@w3.org>
Cc: "'WS Description WG'" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00ac01c2dea5$55b5e7b0$770ba8c0@beasys.com>

How about something a bit from left field:

port->Service
portType->Interface
Service->ServiceCollection
bindings stay as is.


The rationale is that we understand Web pages to be associated with URIs,
and this continues that notion of the primacy of actual instances.  So a Web
service is an actual thing - as opposed to an interface description and/or
an actual thing as it currently is.  I think it's very confusing to talk
about a Web service description, that might not actually have a endpoint in
it.  That a Web service could be just an interface has always seemed very
wrong to me.

I know this will be quite controversial, but hey, at least I'm on record!

I don't see this on the F2F agenda, so I'll look for it in the next
meetings.

Cheers,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Jacek Kopecky
> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 8:22 AM
> To: Philippe Le Hegaret
> Cc: WS Description WG
> Subject: Re: Proposed renamings
>
>
>
> Philippe, others,
>
> I like renaming portType to interface and port into endpoint (notice
> lower-case 'p' as I think it's now one word, I guess I could live with
> endPoint, too, but I think it would be confusing).
>
> I don't like the binding renaming to interfaceBinding, I'd keep
> 'binding' because it's shorter and I think it's clear from the context
> that it is an interface binding (especially if, as I expect, the
> attribute 'type' is renamed to 'interface'). Otherwise we could have
> endpoint -> interfaceEndpoint or even interfaceBindingEndpoint and so
> on.
>
> Best regards,
>
>                    Jacek Kopecky
>
>                    Senior Architect, Systinet Corporation
>                    http://www.systinet.com/
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 21:20, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
> > [I thought I sent these yesterday but don't see it in the
> archives, so
> > sending it again]
> >
> > I've got an action item to start a proposal on renaming
> elements and/or
> > attributes in WSDL 1.2. This proposal is based on the
> latest WSDL 1.2
> > drafts and the requirements document. I'll keep track of
> sub-sequa=ente
> > proposals
> >
> > - portType
> >  The requirements document has the following:
> >  [[
> >  Interface (AKA Port Type)
> >   [Definition: A logical grouping of operations. An
> Interface represents
> >   an abstract Web Service type, independent of transmission
> protocol and
> >   data format.]
> >  ]]
> >  http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-ws-desc-reqs-20021028/#normDefs
> >
> > In 2.4.2 XML Representation of Port Type Component:
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-wsdl12-20030124/#PortType_XMLRep
> >
> >  A [local name] of portType
> >
> >  would read
> >
> >  A [local name] of interface
> >
> > -  EndPoint (AKA Port)
> >  The requirements document has the following:
> >  [[
> >  EndPoint (AKA Port)
> >   [Definition: An association between a fully-specified
> InterfaceBinding
> >   and a network address, specified by a URI [IETF RFC
> 2396], that may be
> >   used to communicate with an instance of a Web Service. An EndPoint
> >   indicates a specific location for accessing a Web Service using a
> >   specific protocol and data format.]
> >  ]]
> >  http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-wsdl12-20030124/#Port_XMLRep
> >
> > In 2.11.2 XML Representation of Port Component
> >
> >  A [local name] of port
> >
> >  would read
> >
> >  A [local name] of endPoint
> >
> >
> > We may also do the following but, if we don't, I'll
> recommend changing
> > the glossary of our requirements document.
> >
> > - binding
> >  The requirements document has the following:
> >  [[
> >  InterfaceBinding
> >   [Definition: An association between an Interface, a
> concrete protocol
> >   and/or a data format. An InterfaceBinding specifies the protocol
> >   and/or data format to be used in transmitting Messages
> defined by the
> >   associated Interface.]
> >  ]]
> >  http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-ws-desc-reqs-20021028/#normDefs
> >
> > In 2.7.2 XML Representation of Binding Component
> > In http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-wsdl12-20030124/#Binding_XMLRep
> >
> >  A [local name] of binding
> >
> >  would read
> >
> >  A [local name] of interfaceBinding
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Thursday, 27 February 2003 16:18:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:22 GMT