Re: Proposed renamings

+1, I prefer the shorter term binding.

++++++++
Steve Graham
sggraham@us.ibm.com
(919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
Emerging Technologies
++++++++



                                                                                                                                       
                      Jacek Kopecky                                                                                                    
                      <jacek@systinet.c        To:       Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>                                              
                      om>                      cc:       WS Description WG <www-ws-desc@w3.org>                                        
                      Sent by:                 Subject:  Re: Proposed renamings                                                        
                      www-ws-desc-reque                                                                                                
                      st@w3.org                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                       
                      02/27/2003 11:22                                                                                                 
                      AM                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                       





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 Friday, 28 February 2003 08:13:26 UTC