RE: LC107 and Inconsistent Component Names

Thank you for your comment - we tracked this as a Last Call comment
LC125 [1].  The Working Group referred agreed to rename using the terms
Interface, InterfaceFault, InterfaceOperation,
InterfaceMessageReference, and InterfaceFaultReference.

 

If we don't hear otherwise within two weeks, we will assume this
satisfies your concern.

 

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC125

 

 

________________________________

From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Arthur Ryman
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 5:38 AM
To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
Subject: LC107 and Inconsistent Component Names

 


I just complete the editorial work for LC107, which I believe does make
the component model property names a lot easier to understand. 

In the process of doing this, I noticed that our component names are a
little inconsistent. We have 2 groups of 5 components, with parallel
structures: 

Interface 
InterfaceFault 
InterfaceOperation 
MessageReference 
FaultReference 

Binding 
BindingFault 
BindingOperation 
BindingMessageReference 
BindingFaultReference 

The odd men out are InterfaceFault and InterfaceOperation. It seems like
the interface prefix is unnecessary. There are 2 ways to handle this: 

Option 1: Drop Interface from InterfaceFault and InterfaceOperation 

Interface 
Fault 
Operation 
MessageReference 
FaultReference 

Option 2: Add Interface to MessageReference and FaultReference 

Interface 
InterfaceFault 
InterfaceOperation 
InterfaceMessageReference 
InterfaceFaultReference 


Option 1 has the benefit of brevity. I prefer this. 

Option 2 has the benefit of complete consistency with the Binding
components. The 2 sets are now related by s/Interface/Binding/ 


Arthur Ryman,
Rational Desktop Tools Development

phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077
assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920
mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text: 4169395063@fido.ca
intranet: http://labweb.torolab.ibm.com/DRY6/