- From: Savas Parastatidis <Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 15:49:59 -0000
- To: "Anne Thomas Manes" <anne@manes.net>
- Cc: <www-ws-desc@w3.org>, "Jim Webber" <jimwebber@hotmail.com>, <distobj@acm.org>
Anne,
>
> There's another thread that's asking whether we should change the
element
> name "operation" to something like"messageExchange". Personally, I
don't
> think it really matters what we call it (although I do have a
preference
> for shorter names over longer names). The purpose of the element
currently
> known as "operation" is to define the input, output, and/or fault
messages
> that get exchanged in the course of a specific node-to-node
interaction.
> (So maybe "interaction" would placate the opponents of "operation"? --
> Whatever!).
What about
<interactions>
<exchange>
<input message="" />
</exchange>
<exchange>
<input message="" />
<output message="" />
</exchange>
<interactions>
Yet something else to consider :-)
.savas.
Received on Tuesday, 28 October 2003 10:50:31 UTC