W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > January 2002

RE: Proposed rewrite of Part 1, section 2 (long)

From: Williams, Stuart <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 17:55:36 -0000
Message-ID: <5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F1928E6@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: "'Marc Hadley'" <marc.hadley@sun.com>
Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Marc,

Firstly, I find the transition from 'actor' to 'role' in the narrative makes
the narrative that is much easier to understand, if as we have been saying
for some time (since Dianrd) that the URI carried in an actor attribute
names/labels a role rather than naming/labeling a particular SOAP node.

I'm also sympathetic to changing renaming the 'actor' attribute to 'role' to
be consistent with the narrative, however I am also open to the change in
the narrative without changing the name of the attribute to avoid any
implementation/interop pain for folks that have actually implemented it. The
downside is that it might leave some lingering confusion between the
narrative description and the name of the attribute... since apart from the
name of the attribute... the concept of actor disappears (I think) and we
are left simply with the roles assumed/played by SOAP nodes.

One editorial:

Sections 2.2 it states:
"While the purpose of a SOAP [actor|role] name is to identify a SOAP
Node..."

This seems to contradict the view that an [actor|role] name names a role and
does not directly identify a SOAP node.

Regards

Stuart

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Hadley [mailto:marc.hadley@sun.com]
> Sent: 21 January 2002 17:36
> To: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: Proposed rewrite of Part 1, section 2 (long)
> Importance: High
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> The editors have been tasked with improving the overall readability of
> the specification and as part of this we would like to 
> propose a rewrite
> of section 2. This section has been the subject of a great deal of
> "micro-editing" and we are concerned not to lose any detail that may
> have been hard fought over in the past. To aid your review we are
> including redlined versions of each proposal that show the differences
> between the current WD and the proposed rewrite. The redlined 
> version's
> filenames are suffixed with "_RL".
> 
> The editors would actually like to propose 2 alternative 
> rewrites, both
> of which remove the term "anonymous actor" which is not used 
> elewhere in
> the specification and is not in the glossary:
> 
> (i) The first "SoapProcessingModel.htm" and 
> "SoapProcessingModel_RL.htm"
> is the less radical of the two and maintains the current terminology
> around SOAP actor and roles.
> 
> (ii) The second "SoapProcessingModelNoActor.htm" and
> SoapProcessingModelNoActor_RL.htm" proposes more radical changes. The
> specification's current use of the word actor is 
> counter-intuitive, e.g.
> we speak about SOAP nodes assuming roles named by SOAP actors. In real
> life roles are not named by actors, actors play roles and 
> this can lead
> to some confusing wording. The second rewrite assumes that we 
> rename the
> "actor" attribute to "role".
> 
> Marc (on behalf of the other editors: Gudge, Jean-Jacques and Henrik)
> 
> -- 
> Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
> XML Technology Centre, Sun Microsystems.
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2002 12:55:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:06 GMT