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

Re: Proposed renamings

From: Roberto Chinnici <Roberto.Chinnici@Sun.COM>
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2003 10:30:14 -0800
To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
Cc: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, WS Description WG <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
Message-id: <3E624DB6.6000701@sun.com>

+1 to everything Jacek said. "interfaceBinding" is quite a mouthful.

Roberto

-- 
Roberto Chinnici
Web Technologies and Standards
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
roberto.chinnici@sun.com



Jacek Kopecky wrote:

>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 Sunday, 2 March 2003 13:32:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:23 GMT