Re: The attribute formerly known as "name"

I like:

message
messageRef(-erence) / messageId
messageName

Since we got rid of the message component, I think we can call it
simply "message" without confusing users.

Roberto


Amelia A. Lewis wrote:

> Dear folks,
> 
> As promised, here is a list of suggestions to rename the attribute
> "name", when it appears on the elements "input", "output", and "fault". 
> This list of proposed replacements is in accord with issue 77, which
> suggested that this instance of the usage of "name" as an attribute was
> not consistent with other usages throughout the specification.
> 
> Several proposals for replacement were made on the 4 September
> teleconference.  Please respond to this email using preference voting,
> indicating your top three preferences (number them 1, 2, and 3, please).
>  I'll try to tabulate responses that I receive (either publicly or
> off-list) immediately before the teleconference next week.  Note that
> you are free to propose an alternative not listed here as well.
> 
> role
> 
> messageRole
> 
> messageType
> 
> messageName
> 
> messageReference
> 
> message
> 
> reference
> 
> identifier
> 
> Amy!
> (that's my name, not a proposal ...)