- 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>
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 UTC