RE: Editorial for Part 1 section 2.18

Martin,

I agree. I think that targetNamespace is a misnomer. It makes sense in the 
definitions element, but not in the component model. Components have 
QNames. I'd like to make the following editorial suggestion to improve the 
naming and simplify the component model.

In the following components, remove the targetNamespace property and 
change the name property to be a QName instead of an NCName:

Intertace
InterfaceFault
InterfaceOperation
Binding
Service

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
intranet: http://w3.torolab.ibm.com/DRY6/



"Martin Gudgin" <mgudgin@microsoft.com> 
Sent by: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org
08/03/2004 06:00 AM

To
"Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>, <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
cc

Subject
RE: Editorial for Part 1 section 2.18







I believe the property used to be called {namespace name} and was
populated with the value of wsdl:definitions/@targetNamespace.
Personally, I think {namespace name} is the better name, as the property
is NOT a *target* namespace when it appears on an interface component (
or any other component for that matter ). To my mine, the notion of
target namespace is purely a serialization detail.

Gudge

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-desc-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-ws-desc-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Bijan Parsia
> Sent: 03 August 2004 10:53
> To: www-ws-desc@w3.org
> Subject: Editorial for Part 1 section 2.18
> 
> 
> "2.18 QName resolution
> 
> In its serialized form WSDL makes significant use of 
> references between 
> components. Such references are made using the Qualified Name, or 
> QName, of the component being referred to. QNames are a tuple, 
> consisting of two parts; a namespace name and a local name. For 
> example, in the case of an Interface component, the namespace name is 
> represented by the {namespace name} property and the local name is 
> represented by the {name} property."
> 
> I can't find any {namespace name} *property* (component). 
> Perhaps it is 
> the {targetNamespace}?
> 
> I see lots of references to [namespace name] Infoset properties.
> 
> Ah, I see in 2.17:
> 
> "Within a symbol space, all qualified names (that is, the combination 
> of {name} and {target namespace} properties) are unique. 
> Between symbol 
> spaces, the combination of these two properties need not be unique. 
> Thus it is perfectly coherent to have, for example, a binding and an 
> interface that have the same name."
> 
> This suggests that it is {targetNamespace}.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan Parsia.
> 
>